Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 1/2017

01-02-2017 | Original Research Article

EQ-5D Health Utility Scores: Data from a Comprehensive Canadian Cancer Centre

Authors: Hiten Naik, Doris Howell, Susie Su, Xin Qiu, M. Catherine Brown, Ashlee Vennettilli, Margaret Irwin, Vivien Pat, Hannah Solomon, Tian Wang, Henrique Hon, Lawson Eng, Mary Mahler, Henry Thai, Valerie Ho, Wei Xu, Soo Jin Seung, Nicole Mittmann, Geoffrey Liu

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To improve the precision of health economics analyses in oncology, reference datasets of health utility (HU) scores are needed from cancer survivors across different disease sites. These data are particularly sparse amongst Canadian survivors.

Methods

A survey was completed by 1759 ambulatory cancer survivors at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre which contained demographic questions and the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) instrument. Clinical information was abstracted from electronic records and HU scores were calculated using Canadian health state valuations. Construct validity was assessed through correlation of HU and visual analog scale (VAS) scores (Spearman) and by comparing HU scores between performance status groups (effect size). The influence of socio-demographic clinical variables on HU was analyzed by non-parametric between-group comparisons and multiple linear regression.

Results

Mean EQ-5D HU scores were derived for 26 cancers. Among all survivors, the mean ± standard error of the mean EQ-5D utility score was 0.81 ± 0.004. Scores varied significantly by performance status (p < 0.0001) and correlated with VAS (Spearman r = 0.61). The cancer sites with the lowest mean HU scores were acute lymphoblastic leukemia (0.70 ± 0.03) and pancreatic cancer (0.76 ± 0.03); testicular cancer (0.89 ± 0.02) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (0.90 ± 0.05) had the highest mean scores. A multiple regression model showed that scores were influenced by disease site (p < 0.001), education level (p < 0.001), partner status (p < 0.001), disease extent (p = 0.0029), and type of most recent treatment (p = 0.0061).

Conclusions

This work represents the first set of HU scores for numerous cancer sites derived using Canadian preference weights. The dataset demonstrated construct validity and HU scores varied by general socio-demographic and clinical parameters.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Canadian Cancer Society, Statistics Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, Provincial/Territorial Cancer Registrie. Canadian cancer statistics 2015. Toronto: Canadian Cancer Society; 2015. Canadian Cancer Society, Statistics Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, Provincial/Territorial Cancer Registrie. Canadian cancer statistics 2015. Toronto: Canadian Cancer Society; 2015.
2.
go back to reference de Oliveira C, Bremner KE, Pataky R, Gunraj N, Haq M, Chan K, et al. Trends in use and cost of initial cancer treatment in Ontario: a population-based descriptive study. CMAJ Open. 2013;1(4):E151–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral de Oliveira C, Bremner KE, Pataky R, Gunraj N, Haq M, Chan K, et al. Trends in use and cost of initial cancer treatment in Ontario: a population-based descriptive study. CMAJ Open. 2013;1(4):E151–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Greenberg D, Neumann PJ. Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses. Value Health. 2006;9(4):213–8.CrossRefPubMed Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Greenberg D, Neumann PJ. Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses. Value Health. 2006;9(4):213–8.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96:5–21.CrossRefPubMed Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96:5–21.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Arnold D, Girling A, Stevens A, Lilford R. Comparison of direct and indirect methods of estimating health state utilities for resource allocation: review and empirical analysis. BMJ. 2009;339:b2688.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Arnold D, Girling A, Stevens A, Lilford R. Comparison of direct and indirect methods of estimating health state utilities for resource allocation: review and empirical analysis. BMJ. 2009;339:b2688.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. London: NICE; 2013. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. London: NICE; 2013.
9.
go back to reference Pickard AS, Wilke CT, Lin H-W, Lloyd A. Health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cancer. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(5):366–84.CrossRef Pickard AS, Wilke CT, Lin H-W, Lloyd A. Health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cancer. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(5):366–84.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337–43.CrossRefPubMed Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337–43.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Basch E, Abernethy AP, Mullins CD, Reeve BB, Lou Smith M, Coons SJ, et al. Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(34):4249–55.CrossRefPubMed Basch E, Abernethy AP, Mullins CD, Reeve BB, Lou Smith M, Coons SJ, et al. Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(34):4249–55.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Barton GR, Sach TH, Jenkinson C, Avery AJ, Doherty M, Muir KR. Do estimates of cost-utility based on the EQ-5D differ from those based on the mapping of utility scores? Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Barton GR, Sach TH, Jenkinson C, Avery AJ, Doherty M, Muir KR. Do estimates of cost-utility based on the EQ-5D differ from those based on the mapping of utility scores? Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Chan KKW, Willan AR, Gupta M, Pullenayegum E. Underestimation of uncertainties in health utilities derived from mapping algorithms involving health-related quality-of-life measures: statistical explanations and potential remedies. Med Decis Mak. 2014;34(7):863–72.CrossRef Chan KKW, Willan AR, Gupta M, Pullenayegum E. Underestimation of uncertainties in health utilities derived from mapping algorithms involving health-related quality-of-life measures: statistical explanations and potential remedies. Med Decis Mak. 2014;34(7):863–72.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Sullivan PW, Mulani PM, Fishman M, Sleep D. Quality of life findings from a multicenter, multinational, observational study of patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Qual Life Res. 2007;16:571–5.CrossRefPubMed Sullivan PW, Mulani PM, Fishman M, Sleep D. Quality of life findings from a multicenter, multinational, observational study of patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Qual Life Res. 2007;16:571–5.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Teckle P, McTaggart-Cowan H, Van der Hoek K, Chia S, Melosky B, Gelmon K, et al. Mapping the FACT-G cancer-specific quality of life instrument to the EQ-5D and SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:203.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Teckle P, McTaggart-Cowan H, Van der Hoek K, Chia S, Melosky B, Gelmon K, et al. Mapping the FACT-G cancer-specific quality of life instrument to the EQ-5D and SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:203.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Conner-Spady BL, Cumming C, Nabholtz J-M, Jacobs P, Stewart D. A longitudinal prospective study of health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients following high-dose chemotherapy with autologous blood stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transpl. 2005;36(3):251–9.CrossRef Conner-Spady BL, Cumming C, Nabholtz J-M, Jacobs P, Stewart D. A longitudinal prospective study of health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients following high-dose chemotherapy with autologous blood stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transpl. 2005;36(3):251–9.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Krahn M, Bremner KE, Tomlinson G, Ritvo P, Irvine J, Naglie G. Responsiveness of disease-specific and generic utility instruments in prostate cancer patients. Qual Life Res. 2007;16:509–22.CrossRefPubMed Krahn M, Bremner KE, Tomlinson G, Ritvo P, Irvine J, Naglie G. Responsiveness of disease-specific and generic utility instruments in prostate cancer patients. Qual Life Res. 2007;16:509–22.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Jang RW, Isogai PK, Mittmann N, Bradbury PA, Shepherd FA, Feld R, et al. Derivation of utility values from European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 questionnaire values in lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5(12):1953–7.CrossRefPubMed Jang RW, Isogai PK, Mittmann N, Bradbury PA, Shepherd FA, Feld R, et al. Derivation of utility values from European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 questionnaire values in lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5(12):1953–7.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Sørensen JB, Klee M, Palshof T, Hansen HH. Performance status assessment in cancer patients. An inter-observer variability study. Br J Cancer. 1993;67(4):773–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sørensen JB, Klee M, Palshof T, Hansen HH. Performance status assessment in cancer patients. An inter-observer variability study. Br J Cancer. 1993;67(4):773–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Bansback N, Tsuchiya A, Brazier J, Anis A. Canadian valuation of EQ-5D health states: preliminary value set and considerations for future valuation studies. PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31115.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bansback N, Tsuchiya A, Brazier J, Anis A. Canadian valuation of EQ-5D health states: preliminary value set and considerations for future valuation studies. PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31115.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
22.
go back to reference Shaw JW, Johnson JA, Coons SJ. US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Med Care. 2005;43(3):203–20.CrossRefPubMed Shaw JW, Johnson JA, Coons SJ. US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Med Care. 2005;43(3):203–20.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Farkkila N, Torvinen S, Roine RP, Sintonen H, Hanninen J, Taari K, et al. Health-related quality of life among breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer patients with end-stage disease. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:1387–94.CrossRefPubMed Farkkila N, Torvinen S, Roine RP, Sintonen H, Hanninen J, Taari K, et al. Health-related quality of life among breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer patients with end-stage disease. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:1387–94.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Grutters JPC, Joore MA, Wiegman EM, Langendijk JA, de Ruysscher D, Hochstenbag M, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients surviving non-small cell lung cancer. Thorax. 2010;65(10):903–7.CrossRefPubMed Grutters JPC, Joore MA, Wiegman EM, Langendijk JA, de Ruysscher D, Hochstenbag M, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients surviving non-small cell lung cancer. Thorax. 2010;65(10):903–7.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Chouaid C, Agulnik J, Goker E, Herder GJM, Lester JF, Vansteenkiste J, et al. Health-related quality of life and utility in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer: a prospective cross-sectional patient survey in a real-world setting. J Thorac Oncol. 2013;8(8):997–1003.CrossRefPubMed Chouaid C, Agulnik J, Goker E, Herder GJM, Lester JF, Vansteenkiste J, et al. Health-related quality of life and utility in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer: a prospective cross-sectional patient survey in a real-world setting. J Thorac Oncol. 2013;8(8):997–1003.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Torvinen S, Farkkila N, Sintonen H, Saarto T, Roine RP, Taari K. Health-related quality of life in prostate cancer. Acta Oncol. 2013;52:1094–101.CrossRefPubMed Torvinen S, Farkkila N, Sintonen H, Saarto T, Roine RP, Taari K. Health-related quality of life in prostate cancer. Acta Oncol. 2013;52:1094–101.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Proskorovsky I, Lewis P, Williams CD, Jordan K, Kyriakou C, Ishak J, et al. Mapping EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-MY20 to EQ-5D in patients with multiple myeloma. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12(1):35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Proskorovsky I, Lewis P, Williams CD, Jordan K, Kyriakou C, Ishak J, et al. Mapping EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-MY20 to EQ-5D in patients with multiple myeloma. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12(1):35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Reichardt P, Leahy M, Garcia Del Muro X, Ferrari S, Martin J, Gelderblom H, et al. Quality of life and utility in patients with metastatic soft tissue and bone sarcoma: the sarcoma treatment and burden of illness in North America and Europe (SABINE) study. Sarcoma. 2012;2012:740279.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Reichardt P, Leahy M, Garcia Del Muro X, Ferrari S, Martin J, Gelderblom H, et al. Quality of life and utility in patients with metastatic soft tissue and bone sarcoma: the sarcoma treatment and burden of illness in North America and Europe (SABINE) study. Sarcoma. 2012;2012:740279.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
go back to reference Tramontano AC, Schrag DL, Malin JK, Miller MC, Weeks JC, Swan JS, et al. Catalog and comparison of societal preferences (utilities) for lung cancer health states: results from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study. Med Decis Mak. 2015;35(3):371–87. doi:10.1177/0272989X15570364.CrossRef Tramontano AC, Schrag DL, Malin JK, Miller MC, Weeks JC, Swan JS, et al. Catalog and comparison of societal preferences (utilities) for lung cancer health states: results from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study. Med Decis Mak. 2015;35(3):371–87. doi:10.​1177/​0272989X15570364​.CrossRef
30.
31.
go back to reference Sullivan PW, Slejko JF, Sculpher MJ, Ghushchyan V. Catalogue of EQ-5D scores for the United Kingdom. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(6):800–4.CrossRefPubMed Sullivan PW, Slejko JF, Sculpher MJ, Ghushchyan V. Catalogue of EQ-5D scores for the United Kingdom. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(6):800–4.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Cheville AL, Almoza M, Courmier JN, Basford JR. A prospective cohort study defining utilities using time trade-offs and the Euroqol-5D to assess the impact of cancer-related lymphedema. Cancer. 2010;116:3722–31.CrossRefPubMed Cheville AL, Almoza M, Courmier JN, Basford JR. A prospective cohort study defining utilities using time trade-offs and the Euroqol-5D to assess the impact of cancer-related lymphedema. Cancer. 2010;116:3722–31.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Askew RL, Swartz RJ, Xing Y, Cantor SB, Ross MI, Gershenwald JE, et al. Mapping FACT-melanoma quality-of-life scores to EQ-5D health utility weights. Value Health. 2011;14(6):900–6.CrossRefPubMed Askew RL, Swartz RJ, Xing Y, Cantor SB, Ross MI, Gershenwald JE, et al. Mapping FACT-melanoma quality-of-life scores to EQ-5D health utility weights. Value Health. 2011;14(6):900–6.CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Oremus M, Tarride J-E, Clayton N, Raina P. Health utility scores in Alzheimer’s disease: differences based on calculation with American and Canadian preference weights. Value Health. 2014;17(1):77–83.CrossRefPubMed Oremus M, Tarride J-E, Clayton N, Raina P. Health utility scores in Alzheimer’s disease: differences based on calculation with American and Canadian preference weights. Value Health. 2014;17(1):77–83.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Mittmann N, Trakas K, Risebrough N, Liu BA. Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population. Pharmacoeconomics. 1999;15(4):369–76.CrossRefPubMed Mittmann N, Trakas K, Risebrough N, Liu BA. Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population. Pharmacoeconomics. 1999;15(4):369–76.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Sullivan PW, Lawrence WF, Ghushchyan V. A national catalog of scores preference-based in the United States for chronic conditions. Med Care. 2005;43(7):736–49.CrossRefPubMed Sullivan PW, Lawrence WF, Ghushchyan V. A national catalog of scores preference-based in the United States for chronic conditions. Med Care. 2005;43(7):736–49.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Pickard AS, Wilke CT, Lin H-W, Lloyd A. Health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cancer. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(5):365–84.CrossRefPubMed Pickard AS, Wilke CT, Lin H-W, Lloyd A. Health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cancer. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(5):365–84.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Wildi SM, Cox MH, Clark LL, Turner R, Hawes RH, Hoffman BJ, et al. Assessment of health state utilities and quality of life in patients with malignant esophageal dysphagia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99(6):1044–9.CrossRefPubMed Wildi SM, Cox MH, Clark LL, Turner R, Hawes RH, Hoffman BJ, et al. Assessment of health state utilities and quality of life in patients with malignant esophageal dysphagia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99(6):1044–9.CrossRefPubMed
40.
go back to reference Hildebrandt T, Thiel FC, Fasching PA, Graf C, Bani MR, Loehberg CR, et al. Health utilities in gynecological oncology and mastology in Germany. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(2):829–35.PubMed Hildebrandt T, Thiel FC, Fasching PA, Graf C, Bani MR, Loehberg CR, et al. Health utilities in gynecological oncology and mastology in Germany. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(2):829–35.PubMed
41.
go back to reference Müller-Nordhorn J, Roll S, Böhmig M, Nocon M, Reich A, Braun C, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with pancreatic cancer. Digestion. 2006;74(2):118–25.CrossRefPubMed Müller-Nordhorn J, Roll S, Böhmig M, Nocon M, Reich A, Braun C, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with pancreatic cancer. Digestion. 2006;74(2):118–25.CrossRefPubMed
42.
go back to reference Marcellusi A, Capone A, Favato G, Mennini FS, Baio G, Haeussler K, et al. Health utilities lost and risk factors associated with HPV-induced diseases in men and women: the HPV Italian Collaborative Study Group. Clin Ther. 2015;37(1):156–67. e4. Marcellusi A, Capone A, Favato G, Mennini FS, Baio G, Haeussler K, et al. Health utilities lost and risk factors associated with HPV-induced diseases in men and women: the HPV Italian Collaborative Study Group. Clin Ther. 2015;37(1):156–67. e4.
43.
go back to reference Dudgeon D, King S, Howell D, Green E, Gilbert J, Hughes E, et al. Cancer Care Ontario’s experience with implementation of routine physical and psychological symptom distress screening. Psychooncology. 2012;21(4):357–64.CrossRefPubMed Dudgeon D, King S, Howell D, Green E, Gilbert J, Hughes E, et al. Cancer Care Ontario’s experience with implementation of routine physical and psychological symptom distress screening. Psychooncology. 2012;21(4):357–64.CrossRefPubMed
44.
go back to reference Färkkilä N, Sintonen H, Saarto T, Järvinen H, Hänninen J, Taari K, et al. Health-related quality of life in colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(5):e215–22.CrossRefPubMed Färkkilä N, Sintonen H, Saarto T, Järvinen H, Hänninen J, Taari K, et al. Health-related quality of life in colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(5):e215–22.CrossRefPubMed
45.
go back to reference Pickard AS, Neary MP, Cella D. Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2007;5:70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Pickard AS, Neary MP, Cella D. Estimation of minimally important differences in EQ-5D utility and VAS scores in cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2007;5:70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
46.
go back to reference Crott R, Versteegh M, Uyl-De-Groot C. An assessment of the external validity of mapping QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D preferences. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(5):1045–54.CrossRefPubMed Crott R, Versteegh M, Uyl-De-Groot C. An assessment of the external validity of mapping QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D preferences. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(5):1045–54.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
EQ-5D Health Utility Scores: Data from a Comprehensive Canadian Cancer Centre
Authors
Hiten Naik
Doris Howell
Susie Su
Xin Qiu
M. Catherine Brown
Ashlee Vennettilli
Margaret Irwin
Vivien Pat
Hannah Solomon
Tian Wang
Henrique Hon
Lawson Eng
Mary Mahler
Henry Thai
Valerie Ho
Wei Xu
Soo Jin Seung
Nicole Mittmann
Geoffrey Liu
Publication date
01-02-2017
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-016-0190-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 1/2017 Go to the issue