Top

Quality of Life Research

Published in:

01-04-2010

Preference values associated with stage III colon cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy

Authors: Jennie H. Best, Louis P. Garrison, William Hollingworth, Scott D. Ramsey, David L. Veenstra

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 3/2010

Abstract

Purpose

To elicit preference values for health states associated with Stage III colon cancer (CRC) and to explore the effect of neuropathy associated with current adjuvant treatment.

Methods

We used time trade-off (TTO) techniques to elicit preferences from 49 CRC patients and 49 community members. We elicited preferences for 7 health states: remission; adjuvant therapy with no, mild, moderate, and severe neuropathy; metastatic stable; and metastatic progressive disease. Mean TTO values were adjusted for the covariates age, education, and current health.

Results

Patients’ adjusted mean TTO value for remission was 0.83; adjuvant chemotherapy health states ranged from 0.48 to 0.61. Significant differences were observed for both patient and community groups between TTO for remission and all adjuvant health states (P < 0.001), and between adjuvant therapy with no neuropathy and metastatic health states (P ≤ 0.001). Across all health states, patients’ values were on average 0.12 higher than community members (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

The findings highlight the trade-offs between the disutility of adjuvant treatment, the higher utility of remission, and the severe utility loss during metastatic disease. The preference values obtained from this study will be useful for informing patients’ treatment decisions and payer cost-utility analyses of adjuvant treatment for colon cancer.

Available only for authorised users

Jemal, A., Siegel, R., Ward, E., Murray, T., Xu, J., & Thun, M. J. (2007). Cancer statistics, 2007. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 57, 43–66.CrossRef

National Comprehensive Cancer Network. (2005). Clinical practice guideline in oncology—Colon cancer (v.2.2006).

Ramsey, S. D. (2007). How should we pay the piper when he’s calling the tune? On the long-term affordability of cancer care in the United States. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25, 175–179.CrossRefPubMed

Schrag, D. (2004). The price tag on progress—Chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. NEJM, 351(4), 317–319.CrossRefPubMed

Twelves, C., Wong, A., Nowacki, M. P., Abt, M., Burris, H., 3rd, Carrato, A., et al. (2005). Capecitabine as adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer. NEJM, 352(26), 2696–2704.CrossRefPubMed

André, T., Boni, C., Mounedji-Boudiaf, L., Navarro, M., Tabernero, J., Hickish, T., et al. (2004). Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as adjuvant treatment for colon cancer. NEJM, 350(23), 2343–2351.CrossRefPubMed

Gold, M. R., Siegel, J. E., Russel, L. B., & Weinstein, M. C. (Eds.). (1996). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press.

National Institute for Clinical Excellence. (2004). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal.

National Institute for Clinical Excellence. (2005). Social value judgements. Guidelines for the institute and its advisory bodies.

10.

Brown, M. L., Nayfield, S. G., & Shibley, L. M. (1994). Adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer: Economic returns to research and cost-effectiveness of treatment. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 86(6), 424–430.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Kievit, J., & van de Velde, C. J. (1990). Utility and cost of carcinoembryonic antigen monitoring in colon cancer follow-up evaluation. A Marhov analysis. Cancer, 65(11), 2580–2587.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Smith, R. D., Hall, J., & Gurney, H. (1993). A cost-utility approach to the use of 5-fluorouracil and levamisole as adjuvant chemotherapy for Dukes’ C colonic carcinoma. Medical Journal of Australia, 158(5), 319–322.PubMed

13.

Dominitz, J. A., & Provenzale, D. (1997). Patient preferences and quality of life associated with colorectal cancer screening. The American Journal of Gastroenterology, 92(12), 2171–2178.PubMed

14.

Boyd, N. F., Sutherland, H. J., Heasman, K. Z., Tritchler, D. L., & Cummings, B. J. (1990). Whose utilities for decision analysis? Medical Decision Making, 10(1), 58–67.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Norum, J., Vonen, B., Olsen, J. A., & Revhaug, A. (1997). Adjuvant chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil and levamisole) in Dukes’ B and C colorectal carcinoma. A cost-effectiveness analysis. Annals of Oncology, 8(1), 65–70.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Ness, R. M., Holmes, A. M., Klein, R., & Dittus, R. (1999). Utility valuations for outcome states of colorectal cancer. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 94(6), 1650–1657.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Ramsey, S., Andersen, M. R., Etzioni, R., Moinpour, C., Peacock, S., Potosky, A., et al. (2000). Quality of life in survivors of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer, 88(6), 1294–1303.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Ramsey, S. D., Berry, K., & Etzioni, R. (2002). Lifetime cancer-attributable cost of care for long-term survivors of colorectal cancer. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 97(2), 440–445.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Lloyd, A., de Jonge, P., Doyle, S., Walker, M., & Cohen, C. (2006). Developing health state descriptions for metastatic colorectal cancer: A qualitative study. Value in Health, 9(3), A115.

20.

Shaw, J. W., Johnson, J. A., & Coons, S. J. (2005). US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: Development and testing of the D1 model. Medical Care, 43(3), 203–220.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Salomon, J., & Murray, C. J. L. (2004). A multi-method approach to measuring health-state valuations. Health Economics, 13, 281–290.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Torrance, G. W. (1987). Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 40(6), 593–600.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Furlong, W., Feeny, D., & Torrance, G. W., et al. (1990). Guide to design and development of health-state utility instrumentation. McMaster University Working paper 90–99.

24.

Stalmeier, P. F., Goldstein, M. K., Holmes, A. M., Lenert, L., Miyamoto, J., Stiggelbout, A. M., et al. (2001). What should be reported in a methods section on utility assessment? Medical Decision Making, 21, 200–207.PubMed

25.

Lenert, L. A., Cher, D. J., Goldstein, M. K., Bergen, M. R., & Garber, A. (1998). The effect of search procedures on utility elicitations. Medical Decision Making, 18(1), 76–83.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Elkin, E. B., Cowen, M. E., Cahill, D., Steffel, M., & Kattan, M. W. (2004). Preference assessment method affects decision-analytic recommendations: A prostate cancer treatment example. Medical Decision Making, 24, 504–510.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Torrance, G. W., Feeny, D., & Furlong, W. (2001). Visual analog scales: Do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Medical Decision Making, 21, 329–334.PubMed

28.

Dolan, P., & Kahneman, D. (2008). Interpretations of utility and their implications for the valuation of health. The Econmic Journal, 118, 215–234.

29.

Smith, M. D., Drummond, M., & Brixner, D. (2009). A different approach to health state valuation. Value in Health, 12(S1), S16–S17.

30.

Grothey, A. (2005). Clinical management of oxaliplatin-associated neurotoxicity. Clinical Colorectal Cancer, 5(Suppl 1), S38–S46.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Stiggelbout, A. M., & de Haes, J. C. (2001). Patient preference for cancer therapy: An overview of measurement approaches. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19(1), 220–230.PubMed

32.

van Osch, S. V., Wakker, P. P., van den Hout, W. B., & Stiggelbout, A. M. (2004). Correcting biases in standard gamble and time tradeoff utilities. Medical Decision Making, 24, 511–517.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Martin, A. J., Glasziou, P. P., Simes, R. J., & Lumley, T. (2000). A comparison of standard gamble, time trade-off, and adjusted time trade-off scores. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Car, 16(1), 137–147.CrossRef

34.

Read, J. L., Quinn, R. J., Berwick, D. M., Fineberg, H. V., & Weinstein, M. C. (1984). Preferences for health outcomes: Comparison of assessment methods. Medical Decision Making, 4, 315–329.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Jansen, S. J. T., Kievit, J., Nooij, M., & Stiggelbout, A. M. (2001). Stability of patients’ preferences for chemotherapy: The impact of experience. Medical Decision Making, 21(4), 295–306.PubMed

36.

Gabriel, S. E., Kneeland, T. S., Melton, L. J., Moncur, M. M., Ettinger, B., & Tosteson, A. N. (1999). Health-related quality of life in economic evaluations for osteoporosis: Whose values should we use? Medical Decision Making, 19(2), 141–148.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Patrick, D. L., Starks, H. E., Cain, K. C., Uhlmann, R. F., & Pearlman, R. A. (1994). Measuring preferences for health states worse than death. Medical Decision Making, 14, 9–18.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Robinson, A., & Spencer, A. (2006). Exploring challenges to TTO utilities: Valuing states worse than dead. Health Economics, 15, 393–402.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Preference values associated with stage III colon cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy
Authors: Jennie H. Best
Louis P. Garrison
William Hollingworth
Scott D. Ramsey
David L. Veenstra
Publication date: 01-04-2010
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: Quality of Life Research / Issue 3/2010
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9589-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Preference values associated with stage III colon cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2010

Socio-demographic and clinical determinants of quality of life in Chinese patients with schizophrenia: a prospective study

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of a Spanish version of the Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia Scale

Habitual physical activity and health-related quality of life in older adults: interactions between the amount and intensity of activity (the Nakanojo Study)

Temporal changes in the causal foundations of palliative care symptoms

Functional abdominal complaints in pre-school children: parental reports of health-related quality of life

Quality of life predicts one-year survival in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators