Skip to main content
Top
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 7/2006

01-07-2006 | Review Article

Cost of Lung Cancer

A Methodological Review

Authors: Laurent Molinier, Christophe Combescure, Cristos Chouaïd, Jean-Pierre Daurès, Bruno Housset, Didier Fabre, Alain Grand, Alain Vergnenègre

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 7/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

Cost of illness (COI) studies estimate the overall economic burden of a specific disease, rather than simply treatment-related costs. While having been criticised for not allowing resource prioritisation, COI studies can provide useful guidance, so long as they adhere to accepted methodology. The aim of this review is to analyse the methods used to evaluate the cost of lung cancer. Because of the increasing incidence and high direct and indirect costs of lung cancer, it is an important disease in terms of economic implications, and therefore provides a relevant example with which to review COI study methodologies.
First, the key points of the methodology relating to COI studies were identified. COI studies relating to lung cancer were then reviewed, focussing on an analysis of the different methods used and an identification of the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.
The COI studies that were analysed confirmed that lung cancer is a costly illness, and that hospitalisation and treatments account for a large part of direct costs, while indirect costs represent a large part of the total costs. The review also showed that COI studies adopted significantly different approaches to estimate the costs of lung cancer, reflecting a lack of consensus on the methodology of COI studies in this area. Hence, to increase the credibility of COI studies, closer agreement among researchers on methodological principles would be desirable.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wiseman V, Mooney G. Burden of illness estimates for priority setting: a debate revisited. Health Policy 1998; 43 (3): 243–251PubMedCrossRef Wiseman V, Mooney G. Burden of illness estimates for priority setting: a debate revisited. Health Policy 1998; 43 (3): 243–251PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005 Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005
3.
go back to reference Koopmanschap MA. Cost-of-illness studies: useful for health policy? Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 14 (2): 143–148PubMedCrossRef Koopmanschap MA. Cost-of-illness studies: useful for health policy? Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 14 (2): 143–148PubMedCrossRef
4.
5.
go back to reference Ament A, Evers S. Cost of illness studies in health care: a comparison of two cases. Health Policy 1993; 26 (1): 29–42PubMedCrossRef Ament A, Evers S. Cost of illness studies in health care: a comparison of two cases. Health Policy 1993; 26 (1): 29–42PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
go back to reference Koopmanschap MA, Van Roijen L, Bonneux L, et al. Current and future costs of cancer. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A (1): 60–65PubMedCrossRef Koopmanschap MA, Van Roijen L, Bonneux L, et al. Current and future costs of cancer. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A (1): 60–65PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot JM, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to lung cancer in Canada and their costs. Br J Cancer 1995; 72 (5): 1270–1277PubMedCrossRef Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot JM, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to lung cancer in Canada and their costs. Br J Cancer 1995; 72 (5): 1270–1277PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot JM, et al. Estimating the cost of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment in Canada: the POHEM model. Can J Oncol 1995; 5 (4): 408–419PubMed Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot JM, et al. Estimating the cost of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment in Canada: the POHEM model. Can J Oncol 1995; 5 (4): 408–419PubMed
10.
go back to reference Goodwin PJ, Shepherd FA. Economic issues in lung cancer: a review. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16 (12): 3900–3912PubMed Goodwin PJ, Shepherd FA. Economic issues in lung cancer: a review. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16 (12): 3900–3912PubMed
11.
go back to reference Berthelot JM, Will BP, Evans WK, et al. Decision framework for chemotherapeutic interventions for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92 (16): 1321–1329PubMedCrossRef Berthelot JM, Will BP, Evans WK, et al. Decision framework for chemotherapeutic interventions for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92 (16): 1321–1329PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Balh A, Falk S. Meta-analysis of single agents in the chemotherapy of NSCLC: what do we want to know? Br J Cancer 2001; 84 (9): 1143–1145CrossRef Balh A, Falk S. Meta-analysis of single agents in the chemotherapy of NSCLC: what do we want to know? Br J Cancer 2001; 84 (9): 1143–1145CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Desch CE, Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Economic considerations in the care of lung cancer patients. Curr Opin Oncol 1996; 8 (2): 126–132PubMedCrossRef Desch CE, Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Economic considerations in the care of lung cancer patients. Curr Opin Oncol 1996; 8 (2): 126–132PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Bunn PA, Kelly K. New combinations in the treatment of lung cancer: a time for optimism. Chest 2000; 117 (4 Suppl. 1): 138S–143SCrossRef Bunn PA, Kelly K. New combinations in the treatment of lung cancer: a time for optimism. Chest 2000; 117 (4 Suppl. 1): 138S–143SCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Johannesson M. Theory and methods of economic evaluation of health care. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996 Johannesson M. Theory and methods of economic evaluation of health care. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996
16.
go back to reference Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF. A practical guide for calculating indirect costs of disease. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 10 (5): 460–466PubMedCrossRef Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF. A practical guide for calculating indirect costs of disease. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 10 (5): 460–466PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Birnbaum H. Friction-cost method as an alternative to the human-capital approach in calculating indirect costs. Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23 (2): 1034CrossRef Birnbaum H. Friction-cost method as an alternative to the human-capital approach in calculating indirect costs. Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23 (2): 1034CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Agro KE, Bradley CA, Mittmann N, et al. Sensitivity analysis in health economic and pharmacoeconomic studies: an appraisal of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (1): 75–88PubMedCrossRef Agro KE, Bradley CA, Mittmann N, et al. Sensitivity analysis in health economic and pharmacoeconomic studies: an appraisal of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (1): 75–88PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot JM, et al. The economics of lung cancer management in Canada. Lung Cancer 1996; 14 (1): 19–29PubMedCrossRef Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot JM, et al. The economics of lung cancer management in Canada. Lung Cancer 1996; 14 (1): 19–29PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Wolstenholme JL, Whynes DK. The hospital costs of treating lung cancer in the United Kingdom. Br J Cancer 1999; 80 (1–2): 215–218PubMedCrossRef Wolstenholme JL, Whynes DK. The hospital costs of treating lung cancer in the United Kingdom. Br J Cancer 1999; 80 (1–2): 215–218PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Weissflog D, Matthys H, Hasse J, et al. Epidemiology and costs of lung cancer in Gennany. Pneumologie 2001; 55 (7): 333–338PubMedCrossRef Weissflog D, Matthys H, Hasse J, et al. Epidemiology and costs of lung cancer in Gennany. Pneumologie 2001; 55 (7): 333–338PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Braud AC, Levy-Piedbois C, Piedbois P, et al. Direct treatment costs for patients with lung cancer from first recurrence to death in France. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21 (9): 671–679PubMedCrossRef Braud AC, Levy-Piedbois C, Piedbois P, et al. Direct treatment costs for patients with lung cancer from first recurrence to death in France. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21 (9): 671–679PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Chouaid C, Molinier L, Combescure C, et al. Economics of the clinical management of lung cancer in France: an analysis using a Markov model. Br J Cancer 2004; 90 (2): 397–402PubMedCrossRef Chouaid C, Molinier L, Combescure C, et al. Economics of the clinical management of lung cancer in France: an analysis using a Markov model. Br J Cancer 2004; 90 (2): 397–402PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Vergnenègre A, Molinier L, Combescure C, et al. Les composantes du coot des strat’egies de prise en charge du cancer du poumon en France. Rev Mal Respir 2004; 21 (3): 501–510PubMedCrossRef Vergnenègre A, Molinier L, Combescure C, et al. Les composantes du coot des strat’egies de prise en charge du cancer du poumon en France. Rev Mal Respir 2004; 21 (3): 501–510PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Evans WK, Le Chevalier T. The cost-effectiveness of navelbine alone or in combination with cisplatin in comparison to other chemotherapy regimens and best supportive care in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer 1996; 32A (13): 2249–2255PubMedCrossRef Evans WK, Le Chevalier T. The cost-effectiveness of navelbine alone or in combination with cisplatin in comparison to other chemotherapy regimens and best supportive care in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer 1996; 32A (13): 2249–2255PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Evans WK. An estimate of the cost effectiveness of gemcitabine in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer. Semin Oncol 1996; 23 (10 Suppl.): 82–89PubMed Evans WK. An estimate of the cost effectiveness of gemcitabine in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer. Semin Oncol 1996; 23 (10 Suppl.): 82–89PubMed
27.
go back to reference Gerard K. Cost-utility in practice: a policy maker’s guide to the state of the art. Health Policy 1992; 21 (3): 249–279PubMedCrossRef Gerard K. Cost-utility in practice: a policy maker’s guide to the state of the art. Health Policy 1992; 21 (3): 249–279PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Maynard A. Economic evaluation techniques in healthcare: reinventing the wheel? Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (2): 115–118PubMedCrossRef Maynard A. Economic evaluation techniques in healthcare: reinventing the wheel? Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (2): 115–118PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Maynard A, McDaid D. Evaluating health interventions: exploiting the potential. Health Policy 2003; 63 (2): 215–226PubMedCrossRef Maynard A, McDaid D. Evaluating health interventions: exploiting the potential. Health Policy 2003; 63 (2): 215–226PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ: the BMJ Working Party on Economic Evaluation. BMJ 1996; 313: 275–283PubMedCrossRef Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ: the BMJ Working Party on Economic Evaluation. BMJ 1996; 313: 275–283PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Cost of Lung Cancer
A Methodological Review
Authors
Laurent Molinier
Christophe Combescure
Cristos Chouaïd
Jean-Pierre Daurès
Bruno Housset
Didier Fabre
Alain Grand
Alain Vergnenègre
Publication date
01-07-2006
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 7/2006
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200624070-00004

Other articles of this Issue 7/2006

PharmacoEconomics 7/2006 Go to the issue

Review Article

Hepatitis C