Health state utility values by cancer stage: a systematic literature review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
Cancer diagnoses at later stages are associated with a decrease in health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Health state utility values (HSUVs) reflect preference-based HRQOL and can vary based on cancer type, stage, treatment, and disease progression. Detecting and treating cancer at earlier stages may lead to improved HRQOL, which is important for value assessments. We describe published HSUVs by cancer type and stage.Methods
A systematic review was conducted using Embase, MEDLINE®, EconLit, and gray literature to identify studies published from January 1999 to September 2019 that reported HSUVs by cancer type and stage. Disutility values were calculated from differences in reported HSUVs across cancer stages.Results
From 13,872 publications, 27 were eligible for evidence synthesis. The most frequent cancer types were breast (n = 9), lung (n = 5), colorectal (n = 4), and cervical cancer (n = 3). Mean HSUVs decreased with increased cancer stage, with consistently lower values seen in stage IV or later-stage cancer across studies (e.g., - 0.74, - 0.44, and - 0.51 for breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer, respectively). Disutility values were highest between later-stage (metastatic or stage IV) cancers compared to earlier-stage (localized or stage I-III) cancers.Conclusions
This study provides a summary of HSUVs across different cancer types and stages that can inform economic evaluations. Despite the large variation in HSUVs overall, a consistent decline in HSUVs can be seen in the later stages, including stage IV. These findings indicate substantial impairment on individuals' quality of life and suggest value in early detection and intervention.
SUBMITTER: Pourrahmat MM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8526485 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundNon-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the predominant histological subtype of lung cancer and is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Quality of life is an important consideration for patients and current treatments can adversely affect health-related quality of life (HRQoL).ObjectiveThe objectives of this systematic literature review (SLR) were to identify and provide a comprehensive catalogue of published health state utility values (HSUVs) in patients with early-stage NSCLC and to understand the factors impacting on HSUVs in this indication.MethodsElectronic searches of Embase, MEDLINE and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews were conducted via the Ovid platform in March 2021 and June 2022 and were supplemented by grey literature searches of conference proceedings, reference lists, health technology assessment bodies, and other relevant sources. Eligibility criteria were based on patients with early-stage (stage I-III) resectable NSCLC receiving treatment in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. No restriction was placed on interventions or comparators, geography, or publication date. English language publications or non-English language publications with an English abstract were of primary interest. A validated checklist was applied to conduct quality assessment of the full publications.ResultsTwenty-nine publications (27 full publications and two conference abstracts) met all eligibility criteria and reported 217 HSUVs and seven disutilities associated with patients with early NSCLC. The data showed that increasing disease stage is associated with decreasing HRQoL. It was also indicated that utility values vary by treatment approach; however, the choice of treatment may be influenced by the patients' disease stage at presentation. Few studies aligned with the requirements of health technology assessment (HTA) bodies, indicating a need for future studies to conform to these preferences, making them suitable for use in economic evaluations.ConclusionsThis SLR found that disease stage and treatment approach were two of several factors that can impact patient-reported HRQoL. Additional studies are warranted to confirm these findings and to investigate emerging therapies for early NSCLC. In collecting a catalogue of HSUV data, this SLR has begun to identify the challenges associated with identifying reliable utility value estimates suitable for use in economic evaluations of early NSCLC.
| S-EPMC10471534 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background. Treatment options in oncology are rapidly advancing, and public payer systems are increasingly under pressure to adopt new but expensive cancer treatments. Cost-utility analyses (CUAs) are used to estimate the relative costs and effects of competing interventions, where health outcomes are measured using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health state utility values (HSUVs) are used to reflect health-related quality of life or health status in the calculation of QALYs. To support reimbursement agencies in the appraisal of oncology drug submissions, which typically include a CUA component, we have proposed a systematic literature review of published HSUV estimates in the field of oncology. Methods. The following databases will be searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, EconLit, and CINAHL. A team of reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, will evaluate abstracts and full-text publications for eligibility against broad inclusion criteria. Studies using a direct, indirect, or combination approach to eliciting preferences related to cancer or cancer treatments are eligible. Data extraction will capture details of study methodology, participants, health states, and corresponding HSUVs. We will summarize our findings with descriptive analyses at this stage. A pilot review in thyroid cancer is presented to illustrate the proposed methods. Discussion. This systematic review will generate a comprehensive summary of the oncology HSUV literature. As a component of the Health Utility Book (HUB) project, we anticipate that this work will assist both health economic modelers as well as critical reviewers in the development and appraisal of CUAs in oncology.
| S-EPMC6696850 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cost-utility analyses assess health gains acquired by interventions by incorporating weighted health state utility values (HSUVs). HSUVs are important in plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) because they include qualitative metrics when comparing operative techniques or interventions. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify the extent and quality of existing original utilities research within PRS.MethodsA systematic review of articles with original PRS utility data was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Subspecialty, survey sample size, and respondent characteristics were extracted. For each HSUV, the utility measure [direct (standard gamble, time trade off, visual analog scale) and/or indirect], mean utility score, and measure of variance were recorded. Similar HSUVs were pooled into weighted averages based on sample size if they were derived from the same utility measure.ResultsIn total, 348 HSUVs for 194 disease states were derived from 56 studies within seven PRS subspecialties. Utility studies were most common in breast (n = 17, 30.4%) and hand/upper extremity (n = 15, 26.8%), and direct measurements were most frequent [visual analog scale (55.4%), standard gamble (46.4%), time trade off (57.1%)]. Studies surveying the general public had more respondents (n = 165, IQR 103-299) than those that surveyed patients (n = 61, IQR 48-79) or healthcare professionals (n = 42, IQR 10-109). HSUVs for 18 health states were aggregated.ConclusionsThe HSUV literature within PRS is scant and heterogeneous. Researchers should become familiar with these outcomes, as integrating utility and cost data will help illustrate that the impact of certain interventions are cost-effective when we consider patient quality of life.
| S-EPMC8615317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth utility values (HUVs) are important inputs to the cost-utility analysis of breast cancer interventions.PurposeProvide a catalog of breast cancer-related published HUVs across different stages of breast cancer and treatment interventions.Data sourcesSystematic searches of MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit, and Cochrane databases (2005-2017).Study selectionStudies published in English that reported mean or median HUVs using direct or indirect methods of utility elicitation for breast cancer.Data extractionIndependent reviewers extracted data on a preestablished and piloted form; disagreements were resolved through discussion.Data analysisMixed-effects meta-regression using restricted maximum likelihood modeling was conducted for intervention type, stage of breast cancer, and typical clinical and treatment trajectory of breast cancer patients to assess the effect of study characteristics (i.e., sample size, utility elicitation method, and respondent type) on HUVs.Data synthesisSeventy-nine studies were included in the review. Most articles (n = 52, 66%) derived HUVs using the EQ-5D. Patients with advanced-stage breast cancer (range, 0.08 to 0.82) reported lower HUVs as compared with patients with early-stage breast cancer (range, 0.58 to 0.99). The meta-regression analysis found that undergoing chemotherapy and surgery and radiation, being diagnosed with an advanced stage of breast cancer, and recurrent cancer were associated with lower HUVs. The members of the general public reported lower HUVs as compared with patients.LimitationsThere was considerable heterogeneity in the study population, health states assessed, and utility elicitation methods.ConclusionThis review provides a catalog of published HUVs related to breast cancer. The substantial heterogeneity in the health utility studies makes it challenging for researchers to choose which HUVs to use in cost-utility analyses for breast cancer interventions.
| S-EPMC9189726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeHealth state utility values are commonly used to inform economic evaluations and determine the cost-effectiveness of an intervention. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise the utility values available to represent the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with thyroid cancer.MethodsEight electronic databases were searched from January 1999 to April 2019 for studies which included assessment of HRQoL for patients with thyroid cancer. Utility estimates derived from multiple sources (EuroQol questionnaire 5-dimension (EQ-5D), time trade-off [TTO] and standard gamble [SG] methods) were extracted. In addition, utility estimates were generated by mapping from SF-36 and EORTC QLQ-30 to the EQ-5D-3L UK value set using published mapping algorithms.ResultsSearches identified 33 eligible studies. Twenty-six studies reported HRQoL for patients with differentiated thyroid cancer and seven studies for patients with general thyroid cancer. We identified studies which used different methods and tools to quantify the HRQoL in patients with thyroid cancer, such as the EQ-5D-3L, SF-36, EORTC QLQ-30 and SG and TTO techniques to estimate utility values. Utility estimates range from 0.205 (patients with low-risk differentiated thyroid cancer) to utility values approximate to the average UK population (following successful thyroidectomy surgery and radioiodine treatment). Utility estimates for different health states, across thyroid cancer sub-types and interventions are presented.ConclusionA catalogue of utility values is provided for use when carrying out economic modelling of thyroid cancer; by including mapped values, this approach broadens the scope of health states that can be considered within cost-effectiveness modelling.
| S-EPMC7952343 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLoneliness and social isolation are recognised as social problems and denote a significant health burden. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review to explore the health state utility values (HSUVs) associated with loneliness and/or social isolation.MethodPeer-reviewed journals published in English language that reported both HSUVs along with loneliness and/or social isolation scores were identified through five databases. No restrictions were made relating to the population, study design or utility estimation method used.ResultsIn total, 19 papers were included; 12 included a measure of loneliness, four studies included a measure of social isolation and three studies considered both loneliness and social isolation. All studies focused on individuals with pre-existing health conditions-where the EQ-5D-3L instrument was most frequently used to assess HSUVs. HSUVs ranged from 0.5 to 0.95 in those who reported not being lonely, 0.42 to 0.97 in those who experienced some level of loneliness, 0.3 to 0.87 in those who were socially isolated and 0.63 to 0.94 in those who were not socially isolated.ConclusionThere was significant variation in HSUVs complicated by the presence of co-morbidities, population heterogeneity, variations in methods used to derive utility scores and differences in the measurement of loneliness and/or social isolation. Nevertheless, the lower HSUVs observed should be considered to significantly impact quality of life, though we also note the need for further research to explore the unique impact of loneliness and social isolation on HSUVs that can be used in the future economic evaluations.
| S-EPMC8785005 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUsing appropriate health state utility values (HSUVs) is critical for economic evaluation of new lung cancer interventions, such as low-dose computed tomography screening and immunotherapy. Therefore, we provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of community- and choice-based HSUVs for lung cancer.MethodsOn 6 March 2017, we conducted a systematic search of the following databases: Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, Google Scholar, and the School of Health and Related Research Health Utility Database. The search was updated on 17 April 2019. Studies reporting mean or median lung cancer-specific HSUVs including a measure of variance were included and assessed for relevance and validity. Studies with high relevance (i.e. community- and choice-based) were further analysed. Mean HSUVs were pooled using random-effects models for all stages, stages I-II, and stages III-IV. For studies with a control group, we calculated the disutility due to lung cancer. A sensitivity analysis included only the methodologically most comparable studies (i.e. using the EQ-5D instrument and matching tariff). Subgroup analyses were conducted by time to death, histology, sex, age, treatment modality, treatment line, and progression status.ResultsWe identified and analysed 27 studies of high relevance. The pooled HSUV was 0.68 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.75) for all stages, 0.78 (95% CI 0.70-0.86) for stages I-II, and 0.69 (95% CI 0.65-0.73) for stages III-IV (p = 0.02 vs. stage I-II). Heterogeneity was present in each pooled analysis (p < 0.01; I2 = 92-99%). Disutility due to lung cancer ranged from 0.11 (95% CI 0.05-0.17) to 0.27 (95% CI 0.18-0.36). In the sensitivity analysis with the methodologically most comparable studies, stage-specific HSUVs varied by country. Such studies were only identified for Canada, China, Spain, the UK, the USA, Denmark, Germany, and Thailand. In the subgroup analysis by time to death, HSUVs for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer ranged from 0.83 (95% CI 0.82-0.85) at ≥ 360 days from death to 0.56 (95% CI 0.46-0.66) at < 30 days from death. Among patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, HSUVs were lower for those receiving third- or fourth-line treatment and for those with progressed disease. Results of subgroup analyses by histology, sex, age, and treatment modality were ambiguous.ConclusionsThe presented evidence supports the use of stage- and country-specific HSUVs. However, such HSUVs are unavailable for most countries. Therefore, our pooled HSUVs may provide the best available stage-specific HSUVs for most countries. For metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, adjusting for the decreased HSUVs in the last year of life may be considered, as may further stratification of HSUVs by treatment line or progression status. If required, HSUVs for other health states may be identified using our comprehensive breakdown of study characteristics.
| S-EPMC7547043 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Health state utility values are commonly used to provide summary measures of health-related quality of life in studies of stroke. Contemporaneous summaries are needed as a benchmark to contextualize future observational studies and inform the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving post-stroke quality of life. Methods and Results We conducted a systematic search of the literature using Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science from January 1995 until October 2020 using search terms for stroke, health-related quality of life, and indirect health utility metrics. We calculated pooled estimates of health utility values for EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, AQoL, HUI2, HUI3, 15D, and SF-6D using random effects models. For the EQ-5D-3L we conducted stratified meta-analyses and meta-regression by key subgroups. We screened 14 251 abstracts and 111 studies met our inclusion criteria (sample size range 11 to 12 447). EQ-5D-3L was reported in 78% of studies (study n=87; patient n=56 976). The pooled estimate for EQ-5D-3L at ≥3 months following stroke was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.63-0.67), which was ≈20% below population norms. There was high heterogeneity (I2>90%) between studies, and estimates differed by study size, case definition of stroke, and country of study. Women, older individuals, those with hemorrhagic stroke, and patients prior to discharge had lower pooled EQ-5D-3L estimates. Conclusions Pooled estimates of health utility for stroke survivors were substantially below population averages. We provide reference values for health utility in stroke to support future clinical and economic studies and identify subgroups with lower healthy utility. Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Unique Identifier: CRD42020215942.
| S-EPMC9333363 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Increasingly, assessment of healthcare technologies and interventions requires the assessment of both costs and utilities. Health state utility values (HSUVs) are measured using a range of generic and condition-specific measures. While reviews have identified that generic measures of HSUVs may lack validity in adults with conditions that result in physical disability, there is little information available on the methods used to obtain HSUVs in children and adolescents with disabilities. The objectives of this systematic review are to describe the methods used to obtain HSUVs, including mode of administration and psychometric properties, and provide summary statistics for HSUVs among children and adolescents with disabilities. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The following databases will be searched from inception for English-language studies of any design: PubMed, PsychInfo, Medline, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, Econlit and EMBASE databases. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full text articles for studies reporting HSUVs and/or data on the psychometric properties of preference-based measures for children and adolescents with disabilities aged up to 19 years. Two reviewers will independently extract data items including descriptors of the study methods and sample, instruments used to capture HSUVs, summary statistics for HSUVs and items relating to the quality of reporting. A descriptive summary of results from included studies and summary statistics for HSUVs will be presented. If sufficient data is identified, we will pool summary statistics for HSUVs according to the method used to obtain the HSUV using a random effects model. In addition, we will explore the determinants of the HSUVs using a meta-regression. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval will not be required as no original data will be collected as part of this review. The completed review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42018086574.
| S-EPMC5855280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study aims to systematically review the literature on health utility in depression generated by time trade-off (TTO) method and to compare health state vignettes.MethodsSystematic literature search was conducted following PRISMA guideline in 2020 November (updated in 2022 March) in Pubmed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Random effect meta-analysis was conducted to pool vignette-based utility values of mild, moderate, and severe depression and to compare the preferences of depressed and nondepressed population.ResultsOverall, 264 records were found, 143 screened by title and abstract after removing duplicates, 18 assessed full text, and 14 original publications included. Majority of the studies (n = 9) used conventional TTO method, and most of the studies (n = 8) applied 10-year timeframe. Eight studies evaluated self-experienced health (own-current depression). Six studies assessed vignette-based health states of remitted, mild, moderate, and severe depression, half of them applied McSad measure based health description. Altogether, 61 different utility values have been cataloged, mean utility of self-experienced depression states (n = 33) ranged between 0.89 (current-own depression) and 0.24 (worst experienced depression). Pooled utility estimates for vignette-based mild, moderate, and severe depression was 0.75, 0.66 and 0.50, respectively. Meta-regression showed that severe depression (β = -0.16) and depressed sample populations (β = -0.13) significantly decrease vignette-based utility scores.ConclusionOur review revealed extent heterogeneity both in TTO methodology and health state vignette development. Patient's perception of depression health states was worse than healthy respondents.
| S-EPMC10063515 | biostudies-literature