Utility Values of Health Status in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review

被引:0
作者
Gonzalez, Cristian [1 ]
Espinoza, Manuel [2 ,3 ]
Libuy, Matias [1 ]
Crispi, Francisca [1 ]
Riquelme, Arnoldo [6 ]
Alarid-Escudero, Fernando [4 ,5 ]
Latorre, Gonzalo [6 ]
Pizarro, Margarita [6 ]
Cuadrado, Cristobal [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Chile, Escuela Salud Publ, Independencia 939, Santiago, RM, Chile
[2] Pontificia Univ Catolica Chile, Dept Salud Publ, Santiago, RM, Chile
[3] Ctr Prevenc & Control Canc CECAN, Santiago, RM, Chile
[4] Stanford Univ, Freeman Spogli Inst, Sch Med, Dept Hlth Policy, Stanford, CA USA
[5] Stanford Univ, Freeman Spogli Inst, Ctr Hlth Policy, Stanford, CA USA
[6] Pontificia Univ Catolica Chile, Fac Med, Sch Med, Dept Gastroenterol, Santiago, RM, Chile
关键词
economic evaluation; EQ-5D; gastric cancer; health-state utility values; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; TIME TRADE-OFF; ECONOMIC-EVALUATION; EQ-5D; ADENOCARCINOMA; METAANALYSIS; GASTRECTOMY;
D O I
10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101063
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: Gastric cancer (GC) imposes a significant burden of disease globally. Multiple treatments are available but are associated with high costs and potentially detrimental effects on quality of life. The utility values of health status are measures of patient preference over quality of life, which are increasingly used for health and economic decision-making. Currently, there is little systematized information on the utility values for different stages of GC. This systematic review synthesizes and meta-analyses the literature on GC utilities. Methods: A search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library for studies reporting utility values calculated using direct and indirect methods. Information from the selected studies was extracted and appraised, and meta-analyses of utility values based on GC health states were performed. Results: Twelve studies involving 4585 patients were included. Random-effects meta-analysis estimates showed a mean utility of 0.77 (95% CI 0.7-0.85) for stage I, 0.75 (95% CI 0.65-0.85) for stage II, 0.70 (95% CI 0.63-0.96) for stage III, and 0.64 (95% CI 0.56-0.32) for stage IV. All estimates showed considerable heterogeneity. Conclusions: Our study provides an updated overview of the literature on utility values in GC and presents a discussion of the relevance of GC stages for its analysis. Decision-makers should consider patients' preferences in the proposal of policies and clinical decisions.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 52 条
  • [1] Search for bottom-squark pair production in pp collision events at √s=13 TeV with hadronically decaying τ-leptons, b-jets, and missing transverse momentum using the ATLAS detector
    Aad, G.
    Abbott, B.
    Abbott, D. C.
    Abud, A. Abed
    Abeling, K.
    Abhayasinghe, D. K.
    Abidi, S. H.
    AbouZeid, O. S.
    Abraham, N. L.
    Abramowicz, H.
    Abreu, H.
    Abulaiti, Y.
    Acharya, B. S.
    Achkar, B.
    Adam, L.
    Bourdarios, C. Adam
    Adamczyk, L.
    Adamek, L.
    Adelman, J.
    Adiguzel, A.
    Adorni, S.
    Adye, T.
    Affolder, A. A.
    Afik, Y.
    Agapopoulou, C.
    Agaras, M. N.
    Aggarwal, A.
    Agheorghiesei, C.
    Aguilar-Saavedra, J. A.
    Ahmad, A.
    Ahmadov, F.
    Ahmed, W. S.
    Ai, X.
    Aielli, G.
    Akatsuka, S.
    Akbiyik, M.
    Akesson, T. P. A.
    Akilli, E.
    Akimov, A., V
    Al Khoury, K.
    Alberghi, G. L.
    Albert, J.
    Verzini, M. J. Alconada
    Alderweireldt, S.
    Aleksa, M.
    Aleksandrov, I. N.
    Alexa, C.
    Alexopoulos, T.
    Alfonsi, A.
    Alfonsi, F.
    [J]. PHYSICAL REVIEW D, 2021, 104 (03)
  • [3] Health State Utility Values in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Aceituno, David
    Pennington, Mark
    Iruretagoyena, Barbara
    Prina, A. Matthew
    McCrone, Paul
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2020, 23 (09) : 1256 - 1267
  • [4] Bray Freddie, 2018, CA Cancer J Clin, V68, P394, DOI [10.3322/caac.21609, 10.3322/caac.21492]
  • [5] The Identification, Review and Synthesis of Health State Utility Values from the Literature
    Ara, Roberta
    Brazier, John
    Peasgood, Tessa
    Paisley, Suzy
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2017, 35 : S43 - S55
  • [6] Areia M, 2014, J GASTROINTEST LIVER, V23, P371, DOI 10.15403/jgld.2014.1121.234.hrq
  • [7] Comparison of direct and indirect methods of estimating health state utilities for resource allocation: review and empirical analysis
    Arnold, David
    Girling, Alan
    Stevens, Andrew
    Lilford, Richard
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2009, 339 : 385 - 388
  • [8] A comparison of United Kingdom and Spanish general population time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states
    Badia, X
    Roset, M
    Herdman, M
    Kind, P
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2001, 21 (01) : 7 - 16
  • [9] A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures
    Brazier, John E.
    Yang, Yaling
    Tsuchiya, Aki
    Rowen, Donna Louise
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2010, 11 (02) : 215 - 225
  • [10] Decision model analyses of upper endoscopy for gastric cancer screening and preneoplasia surveillance: a systematic review
    Canakis, Andrew
    Pani, Ethan
    Saumoy, Monica
    Shah, Shailja C.
    [J]. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2020, 13