Cargando…

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND: Using 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 f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Blom, Erik F., Haaf, Kevin ten, de Koning, Harry J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7547043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32754857
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-020-00947-x
_version_ 1783592350370496512
author Blom, Erik F.
Haaf, Kevin ten
de Koning, Harry J.
author_facet Blom, Erik F.
Haaf, Kevin ten
de Koning, Harry J.
author_sort Blom, Erik F.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Using 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. METHODS: On 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. RESULTS: We 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; I(2) = 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. CONCLUSIONS: The 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. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40273-020-00947-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7547043
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75470432020-10-19 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer Blom, Erik F. Haaf, Kevin ten de Koning, Harry J. Pharmacoeconomics Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Using 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. METHODS: On 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. RESULTS: We 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; I(2) = 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. CONCLUSIONS: The 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. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40273-020-00947-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2020-08-05 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7547043/ /pubmed/32754857 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-020-00947-x Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Blom, Erik F.
Haaf, Kevin ten
de Koning, Harry J.
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer
title Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer
title_full Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer
title_fullStr Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer
title_short Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer
title_sort systematic review and meta-analysis of community- and choice-based health state utility values for lung cancer
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7547043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32754857
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-020-00947-x
work_keys_str_mv AT blomerikf systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunityandchoicebasedhealthstateutilityvaluesforlungcancer
AT haafkevinten systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunityandchoicebasedhealthstateutilityvaluesforlungcancer
AT dekoningharryj systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunityandchoicebasedhealthstateutilityvaluesforlungcancer