Top

20-04-2024

Cancer population norms using a new value set for the SF-6Dv2 based on the preferences of patients with breast or colorectal cancer in Quebec

Auteurs: Moustapha Touré, Sarah-Maria Sfairy, Suzanne K. Bédard, Nathalie McFadden, Robert Hanel, Frédéric Lemay, Jie He, Michel Pavic, Thomas G. Poder

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research

Abstract

Background

Because health resources are limited, health programs should be compared to allow the most efficient ones to emerge. To that aim, health utility instruments have been developed to allow the calculation of quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). However, generic instruments, which can be used by any individual regardless of their health profile, typically consider the preferences of the general population when developing their value set. Consequently, they are often criticized for lacking sensitivity in certain domains, such as cancer. In response, the latest version of the Short Form 6-Dimension (SF-6Dv2) has been adapted to suit the preferences of patients with breast or colorectal cancer in the Canadian province of Quebec. By extension, our study’s aim was to determine cancer population norms of utility among patients with breast or colorectal cancer in Quebec using the SF-6Dv2.

Method

To determine the cancer population norms, we exploited the data that were used in the development of a new value set for the SF-6Dv2. This value set was developed considering the preferences of patients with breast or colorectal cancer. Stratification by time of data collection (i.e., T1 and T2), sociodemographic variables (i.e., age, sex, body mass index, and self-reported health problems affecting quality of life), and clinical aspects (i.e., cancer site, histopathological classification, cancer stage at diagnosis, modality, and treatment characteristics) was performed.

Results

In 353 observations, patients were more likely to have negative utility scores at T1 than at T2. Males had higher mean utility scores than females considering type of cancer and comorbidities. Considering the SF-6Dv2’s dimensions, more females than males reported having health issues, most which concerned physical functioning. Significant differences by sex surfaced for all dimensions except “Role Limitation” and “Mental health.” Patients with multifocal cancer had the highest mean and median utility values in all cancer sites considered.

Conclusion

Cancer population norms can serve as a baseline for interpreting the scores obtained by a given population in comparison to the situation of another group. In this way, our results can assist in comparing utility scores among cancer patients with different sociodemographic groups to other patients/populations groups. To our knowledge, our identified utility norms are the first for patients with breast or colorectal cancer from Quebec.

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Fauteux, V., Poder, T. (2017). État des lieux sur les méthodes d’élicitation du QALY 2017.

Weinstein, M. C., Torrance, G., & McGuire, A. (2009). QALYs: The basics. Value in Health, 12, S5–S9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00515.xCrossRefPubMed

Shiroiwa, T., Fukuda, T., Ikeda, S., Igarashi, A., Noto, S., Saito, S., & Shimozuma, K. (2016). Japanese population norms for preference-based measures: EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-6D. Quality of Life Research, 25, 707–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1108-2CrossRefPubMed

Touré, M., Kouakou, C. R. C., & Poder, T. G. (2021). Dimensions used in instruments for QALY calculation: A systematic review. IJERPH, 18, 4428. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094428CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Brazier, J., Mulhern, B. J., Bjorner, J., Gandek, B., Rowen, D., Alonso, J., Vilagut, G., Ware, J. E., Group, on behalf of the S.-6Dv2 I.P. (2020). Developing a new version of the SF-6D health state classification system from the SF-36v2: SF-6Dv2. Medical Care, 58, 557–565. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001325CrossRefPubMed

Brazier, J., Usherwood, T., Harper, R., & Thomas, K. (1998). Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 health survey. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1115–1128. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00103-6CrossRefPubMed

Brazier, J. E., & Roberts, J. (2004). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Medical Care, 42, 9.CrossRef

Lorgelly, P. K., Doble, B., Rowen, D., & Brazier, J. (2017). Condition-specific or generic preference-based measures in oncology? A comparison of the EORTC-8D and the EQ-5D-3L. Quality of Life Research, 26, 1163–1176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1443-yCrossRefPubMed

Stolk, E. A., & Busschbach, J. J. V. (2003). Validity and feasibility of the use of condition-specific outcome measures in economic evaluation. Quality of Life Research, 12, 363–371.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Versteegh, M. M., Leunis, A., Uyl-de Groot, C. A., & Stolk, E. A. (2012). Condition-specific preference-based measures: Benefit or burden? Value in Health, 15, 504–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.003CrossRefPubMed

11.

Touré, M., Pavic, M., & Poder, T. G. (2023). Second version of the short form 6-dimension value set elicited from patients with breast and colorectal cancer: A hybrid approach. Medical Care, 61, 536–545. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001880CrossRefPubMed

12.

Mulhern, B. J., Bansback, N., Norman, R., Brazier, J., Group, on behalf of the S.-6Dv2 I.P. (2020). Valuing the SF-6Dv2 classification system in the United Kingdom using a discrete-choice experiment with duration. Medical Care, 58, 566–573. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001324CrossRefPubMed

13.

Versteegh, M. M., & Brouwer, W. B. F. (2016). Patient and general public preferences for health states: A call to reconsider current guidelines. Social Science & Medicine, 165, 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.07.043CrossRef

14.

Berg, B. (2012). SF-6D population norms. Health Economics. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1823CrossRefPubMed

15.

Poder, T. G., Carrier, N., & Kouakou, C. R. C. (2020). Quebec health-related quality-of-life population norms using the EQ-5D-5L: Decomposition by sociodemographic data and health problems. Value in Health, 23, 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.08.008CrossRefPubMed

16.

Stavem, K., Augestad, L. A., Kristiansen, I. S., & Rand, K. (2018). General population norms for the EQ-5D-3 L in Norway: Comparison of postal and web surveys. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 16, 204. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-1029-1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Hu, W., Zhou, L., Chu, J., Sun, N., Chen, X., Liu, S., & Shen, Y. (2022). Estimating population norms for the health-related quality of life of adults in Southern Jiangsu Province, China. Scientific Reports, 12, 9906. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13910-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Hawthorne, G., & Osborne, R. (2005). Population norms and meaningful differences for the assessment of quality of life (AQoL) measure. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 29, 136–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-842X.2005.tb00063.xCrossRefPubMed

19.

Mann, R., Brazier, J., & Tsuchiya, A. (2009). A comparison of patient and general population weightings of EQ-5D dimensions. Health Economics, 18, 363–372. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1362CrossRefPubMed

20.

Poder, T. G., Carrier, N., McFadden, N., & Pavic, M. (2019). Health utilities in cancer patients. Medicine (Baltimore). https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000014647CrossRefPubMed

21.

Poder, T. G., & Carrier, N. (2022). Quebec health-related quality of life population norms in adults using the SF-6Dv2: Decomposition by sociodemographic data and health problems. Medical Care, 60, 545–554. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001730CrossRefPubMed

22.

Janssen, B., Szende, A. (2014). Population norms for the EQ-5D. In A. Szende, B. Janssen, J. Cabases (Eds.), Self-reported population health: An international perspective based on EQ-5D. Dordrecht: Springer. ISBN 978-94-007-7595-4.

23.

Midanik, L. T., Soghikian, K., Ransom, L. J., & Tekawa, I. S. (1995). The effect of retirement on mental health and health behaviors: The Kaiser permanente retirement study. Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 50, S59–S61. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/50b.1.s59CrossRefPubMed

24.

Winawer, S., Classen, M., Lambert, R., Fried, M., Dite, P., Goh, K. L., Guarner, F., Lieberman, D., Eliakim, R., Levin, B., et al. (2008). Colorectal cancer screening: World gastroenterology organisation/international digestive cancer alliance practice guidelines. South African Gastroenterology Review, 6, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.4314/sagr.v6i1.30745CrossRef

25.

Benson, J. R., Jatoi, I., Keisch, M., Esteva, F. J., Makris, A., Jordan, V. C. (2009). Early Breast Cancer 2009.

26.

Hortobagyi, G. N., de la Garza Salazar, J., Pritchard, K., Amadori, D., Haidinger, R., Hudis, C. A., Khaled, H., Liu, M.-C., Martin, M., Namer, M., et al. (2005). The global breast cancer burden: Variations in epidemiology and survival. Clinical Breast Cancer, 6, 391–401. https://doi.org/10.3816/CBC.2005.n.043CrossRefPubMed

27.

Arraras, J. I., Nolte, S., Liegl, G., Rose, M., Manterola, A., Illarramendi, J. J., Zarandona, U., Rico, M., Teiejria, L., Asin, G., et al. (2021). General Spanish population normative data analysis for the EORTC QLQ-C30 by sex, age, and health condition. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19, 208. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01820-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Mercieca-Bebber, R., Costa, D. S., Norman, R., Janda, M., Smith, D. P., Grimison, P., Gamper, E.-M., & King, M. T. (2019). The EORTC quality of life questionnaire for cancer patients (QLQ-C30): Australian general population reference values. Medical Journal of Australia, 210, 499–506. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.50207CrossRefPubMed

29.

Yun, Y. H., Kim, S. H., Lee, K. M., Park, S. M., & Kim, Y. M. (2007). Age, sex, and comorbidities were considered in comparing reference data for health-related quality of life in the general and cancer populations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 1164–1175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.12.014CrossRefPubMed

30.

Sørensen, J., Davidsen, M., Gudex, C., Pedersen, K. M., & Brønnum-Hansen, H. (2009). Danish EQ-5D population norms. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 37, 467–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494809105286CrossRefPubMed

31.

Luo, N., Johnson, J. A., Shaw, J. W., Feeny, D., & Coons, S. J. (2005). Self-reported health status of the general adult U.S. population as assessed by the EQ-5D and health utilities index. Medical Care, 43, 1078–1086. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000182493.57090.c1CrossRefPubMed

32.

Yao, Q., Liu, C., Zhang, Y., & Xu, L. (2021). Population norms for the EQ-5D-3L in China derived from the 2013 National Health Services Survey. Journal of Global Health, 11, 08001. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.11.08001CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Clemens, S., Begum, N., Harper, C., Whitty, J. A., & Scuffham, P. A. (2014). A comparison of EQ-5D-3L population norms in Queensland, Australia, estimated using utility value sets from Australia, the UK and USA. Quality of Life Research, 23, 2375–2381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0676-xCrossRefPubMed

34.

Kularatna, S., Whitty, J. A., Johnson, N. W., Jayasinghe, R., & Scuffham, P. A. (2014). EQ-5D-3L derived population norms for health related quality of life in Sri Lanka. PLoS ONE, 9, e108434. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108434CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Dragomir, A., Rocha, J., Vanhuyse, M., Cury, F. L., Kassouf, W., Hu, J., & Aprikian, A. G. (2017). Treatment patterns and trends in patients dying of prostate cancer in Quebec: A population-based study. Current Oncology, 24, 240–248. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.24.3598CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Cancer population norms using a new value set for the SF-6Dv2 based on the preferences of patients with breast or colorectal cancer in Quebec
Auteurs: Moustapha Touré
Sarah-Maria Sfairy
Suzanne K. Bédard
Nathalie McFadden
Robert Hanel
Frédéric Lemay
Jie He
Michel Pavic
Thomas G. Poder
Publicatiedatum: 20-04-2024
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-024-03653-9

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Background

Method

Results

Conclusion

Log in om toegang te krijgen