Cargando…

Systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer

OBJECTIVE: To appraise the sources of evidence and methods to estimate input parameter values in decision-analytic model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of treatments for primary breast cancer (PBC) in older patients (≥ 70 years old). METHODS: Two electronic databases (Ovid Medline, Ovid EMBASE) w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Yubo, Gavan, Sean P., Steinke, Douglas, Cheung, Kwok-Leung, Chen, Li-Chia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8889747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35232445
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00342-7
_version_ 1784661472307052544
author Wang, Yubo
Gavan, Sean P.
Steinke, Douglas
Cheung, Kwok-Leung
Chen, Li-Chia
author_facet Wang, Yubo
Gavan, Sean P.
Steinke, Douglas
Cheung, Kwok-Leung
Chen, Li-Chia
author_sort Wang, Yubo
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To appraise the sources of evidence and methods to estimate input parameter values in decision-analytic model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of treatments for primary breast cancer (PBC) in older patients (≥ 70 years old). METHODS: Two electronic databases (Ovid Medline, Ovid EMBASE) were searched (inception until 5 September-2021) to identify model-based full economic evaluations of treatments for older women with PBC as part of their base-case target population or age-subgroup analysis. Data sources and methods to estimate four types of input parameters including health-related quality of life (HRQoL); natural history; treatment effect; resource use were extracted and appraised. Quality assessment was completed by reference to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. RESULTS: Seven model-based economic evaluations were included (older patients as part of their base-case (n = 3) or subgroup (n = 4) analysis). Data from younger patients (< 70 years) were used frequently to estimate input parameters. Different methods were adopted to adjust these estimates for an older population (HRQoL: disutility multipliers, additive utility decrements; Natural history: calibration of absolute values, one-way sensitivity analyses; Treatment effect: observational data analysis, age-specific behavioural parameters, plausible scenario analyses; Resource use: matched control observational data analysis, age-dependent follow-up costs). CONCLUSION: Improving estimated input parameters for older PBC patients will improve estimates of cost-effectiveness, decision uncertainty, and the value of further research. The methods reported in this review can inform future cost-effectiveness analyses to overcome data challenges for this population. A better understanding of the value of treatments for these patients will improve population health outcomes, clinical decision-making, and resource allocation decisions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-022-00342-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8889747
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88897472022-03-09 Systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer Wang, Yubo Gavan, Sean P. Steinke, Douglas Cheung, Kwok-Leung Chen, Li-Chia Cost Eff Resour Alloc Systematic Review OBJECTIVE: To appraise the sources of evidence and methods to estimate input parameter values in decision-analytic model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of treatments for primary breast cancer (PBC) in older patients (≥ 70 years old). METHODS: Two electronic databases (Ovid Medline, Ovid EMBASE) were searched (inception until 5 September-2021) to identify model-based full economic evaluations of treatments for older women with PBC as part of their base-case target population or age-subgroup analysis. Data sources and methods to estimate four types of input parameters including health-related quality of life (HRQoL); natural history; treatment effect; resource use were extracted and appraised. Quality assessment was completed by reference to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. RESULTS: Seven model-based economic evaluations were included (older patients as part of their base-case (n = 3) or subgroup (n = 4) analysis). Data from younger patients (< 70 years) were used frequently to estimate input parameters. Different methods were adopted to adjust these estimates for an older population (HRQoL: disutility multipliers, additive utility decrements; Natural history: calibration of absolute values, one-way sensitivity analyses; Treatment effect: observational data analysis, age-specific behavioural parameters, plausible scenario analyses; Resource use: matched control observational data analysis, age-dependent follow-up costs). CONCLUSION: Improving estimated input parameters for older PBC patients will improve estimates of cost-effectiveness, decision uncertainty, and the value of further research. The methods reported in this review can inform future cost-effectiveness analyses to overcome data challenges for this population. A better understanding of the value of treatments for these patients will improve population health outcomes, clinical decision-making, and resource allocation decisions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-022-00342-7. BioMed Central 2022-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8889747/ /pubmed/35232445 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00342-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits 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/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Wang, Yubo
Gavan, Sean P.
Steinke, Douglas
Cheung, Kwok-Leung
Chen, Li-Chia
Systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer
title Systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer
title_full Systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer
title_fullStr Systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer
title_short Systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer
title_sort systematic review of the evidence sources applied to cost-effectiveness analyses for older women with primary breast cancer
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8889747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35232445
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00342-7
work_keys_str_mv AT wangyubo systematicreviewoftheevidencesourcesappliedtocosteffectivenessanalysesforolderwomenwithprimarybreastcancer
AT gavanseanp systematicreviewoftheevidencesourcesappliedtocosteffectivenessanalysesforolderwomenwithprimarybreastcancer
AT steinkedouglas systematicreviewoftheevidencesourcesappliedtocosteffectivenessanalysesforolderwomenwithprimarybreastcancer
AT cheungkwokleung systematicreviewoftheevidencesourcesappliedtocosteffectivenessanalysesforolderwomenwithprimarybreastcancer
AT chenlichia systematicreviewoftheevidencesourcesappliedtocosteffectivenessanalysesforolderwomenwithprimarybreastcancer