Comparison of EQ-5D-3L with QLU-C10D in Metastatic Melanoma Using Cost-Utility Analysis.
Comparison of EQ-5D-3L with QLU-C10D in Metastatic Melanoma Using Cost-Utility Analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s41669-021-00265-8
复制
发表时间：
2021-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Liew D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kim H;Cook G;Goodall S;Liew D
美国国家健康与护理卓越研究所（NICE）倾向于使用通用EQ-5D工具来估计质量调整生命年（QFD），并建议仅在EQ-5D数据不可用或不适用时使用特定条件工具。本研究旨在通过在已发表的转移性黑色素瘤免疫治疗成本效用分析（CUA）中应用两组值，比较使用通用EQ-5D-3L工具与特定条件生活质量效用测量核心10个维度（QLU-C10 D）的效用增益和成本效益结果。生活质量数据来自使用QLQ-C30和EQ-5D-3L工具的临床研究。使用三态马尔可夫模型评估了这两种工具对成本效益的潜在影响。描述性统计和标准的卫生经济产出进行了比较分析，采用两种不同的效用措施。QLU-C10 D测量的平均基线效用值（均值= 0. 744，SD = 0. 219）与EQ-5D-3L得出的值（均值= 0. 735，SD = 0. 239）相比无统计学差异（p > 0. 05）。两种仪器相关（Pearson相关系数= 0.74）;然而，基线一致性较低（Lin一致性相关系数< 0.90）。该模型预测使用EQ-5D-3L时获得的QOL略高于QLU-C10 D衍生效用（分别为1.87 vs 1.74）。这导致使用EQ-5D-3L实用程序时的增量成本效益比为30.5K美元，而使用QLU-C10 D实用程序时为32.7K美元。基于这两组效用的成本效益可接受性曲线几乎无法区分。本研究支持在免疫疗法治疗的转移性黑色素瘤中使用通用EQ-5D工具，并发现使用澳大利亚权重时使用疾病特异性QLU-C10 D没有额外获益。
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) prefers the use of the generic EQ-5D instrument to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and recommends that condition-specific instruments only be used when EQ-5D data are not available or not appropriate. This study aimed to compare the utility gain and cost-effectiveness results of using the generic EQ-5D-3L instrument to the condition-specific Quality-of-Life Utility Measure–Core 10 dimensions (QLU-C10D) by applying both sets of values in a published cost-utility analysis (CUA) of immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma. Quality-of-life data were drawn from a clinical study in which both QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-3L tools were used. The potential influence of the two instruments on cost-effectiveness was assessed using a three-state Markov model. Descriptive statistics and standard health economic outputs were compared between analyses that applied the two different utility measures. Mean baseline utility values as measured by the QLU-C10D (mean = 0.744, SD = 0.219) were not statistically different (p > 0.05) compared to values derived from EQ-5D-3L (mean = 0.735, SD = 0.239). The two instruments were correlated (Pearson’s correlation = 0.74); however, concordance was low (Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient < 0.90) at baseline. The model predicted slightly higher QALYs gained when using EQ-5D-3L over QLU-C10D-derived utilities (1.87 vs 1.74, respectively). This resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$30.5K when using EQ-5D-3L utilities, compared to US$32.7K when using QLU-C10D utilities. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves based on the two sets of utilities were almost indistinguishable. This study supports the use of the generic EQ-5D instrument in immunotherapy treated metastatic melanoma, and found no additional benefit for using the disease-specific QLU-C10D when using Australian weights.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1056/nejmoa1003466
发表时间：
2010-08-19
期刊：
The New England journal of medicine
影响因子：
--
作者：
Hodi FS;O'Day SJ;McDermott DF;Weber RW;Sosman JA;Haanen JB;Gonzalez R;Robert C;Schadendorf D;Hassel JC;Akerley W;van den Eertwegh AJ;Lutzky J;Lorigan P;Vaubel JM;Linette GP;Hogg D;Ottensmeier CH;Lebbé C;Peschel C;Quirt I;Clark JI;Wolchok JD;Weber JS;Tian J;Yellin MJ;Nichol GM;Hoos A;Urba WJ
通讯作者：
Urba WJ
影响因子：
3.6
作者：
Brazier, J. E.;Rowen, D.;Ibbotson, R.
通讯作者：
Ibbotson, R.
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Bohensky, Megan A.;Pasupathi, Kumar;Liew, Danny
通讯作者：
Liew, Danny
影响因子：
3.5
作者：
King, M. T.;Costa, D. S. J.;Viney, R.
通讯作者：
Viney, R.
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
King MT;Viney R;Simon Pickard A;Rowen D;Aaronson NK;Brazier JE;Cella D;Costa DSJ;Fayers PM;Kemmler G;McTaggart-Cowen H;Mercieca-Bebber R;Peacock S;Street DJ;Young TA;Norman R;MAUCa Consortium
通讯作者：
MAUCa Consortium