Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-06-2008

Quality of life valuations of mammography screening

Auteurs: Amy E. Bonomi, Denise M. Boudreau, Paul A. Fishman, Evette Ludman, Amy Mohelnitzky, Elizabeth A. Cannon, Deb Seger

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 5/2008

Abstract

Objective To obtain quality-of-life (QOL) valuations associated with mammography screening and breast cancer treatment that are suitable for use in cost-effectiveness analyses.

Methods Subjects comprised 131 women (age range 50–79 years) randomly sampled from a breast cancer screening program. In an in-person or telephone interview, women rated the QOL impact of 14 clinical scenarios (ranging from mammography to end-of-life care for breast cancer) using a visual analogue scale anchored by death (0) and perfect health/quality of life (100).

Results Women rated the scenarios describing true negative results, false positive results, and routine screening mammography at 80 or above on a scale of 0–100, suggesting that they perceive these states as being close to perfect health. They rated adjuvant chemotherapy (39.7; range 10–90), palliation/end-of-life care (35.8; range 0–100), and recurrence at 1 year (33.0; range 0–95) the lowest, suggesting that these health states are perceived as compromised. Women rated receiving news of a breast cancer diagnosis (true positive) (45.7; range 5–100) and receiving delayed news of a breast cancer diagnosis (false negative) (48.5; range 5–100) as being comparable to undergoing mastectomy (48.3; range 10–100) and radiation therapy (46.2; range 5–100) for breast cancer.

Conclusions These data can be used to update cost analyses of mammography screening that wish to take into account the QOL impact of screening.

vorige artikel An empirical comparison of the WHOQOL-BREF and the SGRQ among patients with COPD

volgende artikel The disutility of chronic gout

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Tabar, L., Fagerberg, C. J., Gad, A., Baldetorp, L., Holmberg, L. H., Grontoft, O. et al. (1985). Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet, 1, 829–832. doi10.1016/S0140-6736(85)92204-4:.PubMedCrossRef

Tabar, L., Yen, M. F., Vitak, B., Chen, H. H., Smith, R. A., & Duffy, S. W. (2003). Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet, 361, 1405–1410. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13143-1.PubMedCrossRef

Taplin, S. H., Thompson, R. S., Schnitzer, F., Anderman, C., & Immanuel, V. (1990). Revisions in the risk-based Breast Cancer Screening Program at Group Health Cooperative. Cancer, 66, 812–818. doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19900815)66:4≤812::AID-CNCR2820660436≥3.0.CO;2-1.

Taplin, S. H., Ichikawa, L., Buist, D. S., Seger, D., & White, E. (2004). Evaluating organized breast cancer screening implementation: The prevention of late-stage disease? Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 13, 225–234. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-03-0206.PubMedCrossRef

Rimer, B. K., & Bluman, L. G. (1997). The psychosocial consequences of mammography. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 131–138.PubMed

Brett, J., Bankhead, C., Henderson, B., Watson, E., & Austoker, J. (2005). The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review. Psycho-oncology, 14, 917–938. doi:10.1002/pon.904.PubMedCrossRef

Christiansen, C. L., Wang, F., Barton, M. B., Kreuter, W., Elmore, J. G., Gelfand, A. E. et al. (2000). Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms. Journal of National Cancer Institute, 92, 1657–1666. doi:10.1093/jnci/92.20.1657.CrossRef

Lampic, C., Thurfjell, E., Bergh, J., & Sjoden, P. O. (2001). Short- and long-term anxiety and depression in women recalled after breast cancer screening. European Journal of Cancer, 37, 463–469. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00426-3.PubMedCrossRef

Drossaert, C. H., Boer, H., & Seydel, E. R. (2001). Does mammographic screening and a negative result affect attitudes towards future breast screening? Journal of Medical Screening, 8, 204–212. doi:10.1136/jms.8.4.204.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Gram, I. T., Lund, E., & Slenker, S. E. (1990). Quality of life following a false positive mammogram. British Journal of Cancer, 62, 1018–1022.PubMed

11.

Sutton, S., Saidi, G., Bickler, G. & Hunter J. (1995). Does routine screening for breast cancer raise anxiety? Results from a three-wave prospective study in England. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 49, 413–418.PubMed

12.

Schwartz, L. M., Woloshin, S., Sox, H. C., Fischhoff, B., & Welch, H. G. (2000). US women’s attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: Cross-sectional survey. British Medical Journal, 320, 1635–1640. doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7250.1635.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Fairclough, D. L., Fetting, J. H., Cella, D., Wonson, W., & Moinpour, C. M. (1999). Quality of life and quality adjusted survival for breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant therapy. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG). Quality of Life Research, 8, 723–731. doi:10.1023/A:1008806828316.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Ganz, P. A., Kwan, L., Stanton, A. L., Krupnick, J. L., Rowland, J. H., Meyerowitz, B. E. et al. (2004). Quality of life at the end of primary treatment of breast cancer: First results from the moving beyond cancer randomized trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 96, 376–387.PubMed

15.

Ganz, P. A. (2001). Impact of tamoxifen adjuvant therapy on symptoms, functioning, and quality of life. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 30, 130–134.PubMed

16.

Ganz, P. A., Rowland, J. H., Desmond, K., Meyerowitz, B. E., & Wyatt, G. E. (1998). Life after breast cancer: Understanding women’s health-related quality of life and sexual functioning. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 16, 501–514.PubMed

17.

Ganz, P. A., Rowland, J. H., Meyerowitz, B. E., & Desmond, K. A. (1998). Impact of different adjuvant therapy strategies on quality of life in breast cancer survivors. Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung, 152, 396–411.PubMed

18.

Goss, P. E., Ingle, J. N., Martino, S., Robert, N. J., Muss, H. B., Piccart, M. J. et al. (2003). A randomized trial of letrozole in postmenopausal women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for early-stage breast cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine, 349, 1793–1802. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa032312.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Kramer, J. A., Curran, D., Piccart, M., de Haes, J. C., Bruning, P. F., Klijn, J. G. et al. (2000). Randomised trial of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: Quality of life evaluation using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Rotterdam symptom checklist. European Journal of Cancer, 36, 1488–1497. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00134-9.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Kristensen, B., Ejlertsen, B., Groenvold, M., Hein, S., Loft, H., & Mouridsen, H. T. (1999). Oral clodronate in breast cancer patients with bone metastases: A randomized study. Journal of Internal Medicine, 246, 67–74. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2796.1999.00507.x.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Lerman, C., Trock, B., Rimer, B. K., Boyce, A., Jepson, C., & Engstrom, P. F. (1991). Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Annals of Internal Medicine, 114, 657–661.PubMed

22.

Pandya, K. J., Raubertas, R. F., Flynn, P. J., Hynes, H. E., Rosenbluth, R. J., Kirshner, J. J. et al. (2000). Oral clonidine in postmenopausal patients with breast cancer experiencing tamoxifen-induced hot flashes: A University of Rochester Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program study. Annals of Internal Medicine, 132, 788–793.PubMed

23.

Rowland, J. H., Desmond, K. A., Meyerowitz, B. E., Belin, T. R., Wyatt, G. E., & Ganz, P. A. (2000). Role of breast reconstructive surgery in physical and emotional outcomes among breast cancer survivors. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 92, 1422–1429. doi:10.1093/jnci/92.17.1422.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Joensuu, H., Holli, K., Heikkinen, M., Suonio, E., Aro, A. R., Hietanen, P. et al. (1998). Combination chemotherapy versus single-agent therapy as first- and second-line treatment in metastatic breast cancer: A prospective randomized trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 16, 3720–3730.PubMed

25.

Curran, D., van Dongen, J. P., Aaronson, N. K., Kiebert, G., Fentiman, I. S., Mignolet, F. et al. (1998). Quality of life of early-stage breast cancer patients treated with radical mastectomy or breast-conserving procedures: Results of EORTC Trial 10801. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), Breast Cancer Co-operative Group (BCCG). European Journal of Cancer, 34, 307–314. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(97)00312-2.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Stewart, D. J., Evans, W. K., Shepherd, F. A., Wilson, K. S., Pritchard, K. I., Trudeau, M. E. et al. (1997). Cyclophosphamide and fluorouracil combined with mitoxantrone versus doxorubicin for breast cancer: Superiority of doxorubicin. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 15, 1897–1905.PubMed

27.

de Haes, J. C., de Koning, H. J., van Oortmarssen, G. J., van Agt, H. M., de Bruyn, A. E., & van Der Maas, P. J. (1991). The impact of a breast cancer screening programme on quality-adjusted life-years. International Journal of Cancer, 49, 538–544. doi:10.1002/ijc.2910490411.CrossRef

28.

de Koning, H. J., van Ineveld, B. M., van Oortmarssen, G. J., de Haes, J. C., Collette, H. J., Hendriks, J. H. et al. (1991). Breast cancer screening and cost-effectiveness; policy alternatives, quality of life considerations and the possible impact of uncertain factors. International Journal of Cancer, 49, 531–537. doi:10.1002/ijc.2910490410.CrossRef

29.

Gyrd-Hansen, D. (2001). Analyzing public preferences for cancer screening programmes. Health Economics, 10, 617–634. doi:10.1002/hec.622.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Hall, J., Gerard, K., Salkeld, G., & Richardson, J. (1992). A cost utility analysis of mammography screening in Australia. Social Science & Medicine, 34, 993–1004. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(92)90130-I.CrossRef

31.

Johnston, K., Brown, J., Gerard, K., O’Hanlon, M., & Morton, A. (1998). Valuing temporary and chronic health states associated with breast screening. Social Science & Medicine, 47, 213–222. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00065-3.CrossRef

32.

Chie, W. C., Huang, C. S., Chen, J. H., & Chang, K. J. (2000). Utility assessment for different clinical phases of breast cancer in Taiwan. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association =Taiwan yi zhi, 99, 677–683.PubMed

33.

Stout, N. K., Rosenberg, M. A., Trentham-Dietz, A., Smith, M. A., Robinson, S. M., & Fryback, D. G. (2006). Retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis of screening mammography. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 98, 774–782.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Jansen, S. J., Kievit, J., Nooij, M. A., & Stiggelbout, A. M. (2001). Stability of patients’ preferences for chemotherapy: The impact of experience. Medical Decision Making, 21, 295–306. doi:10.1177/02729890122062596.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Jansen, S. J., Stiggelbout, A. M., Wakker, P. P., Nooij, M. A., Noordijk, E. M., & Kievit, J. (2000). Unstable preferences: A shift in valuation or an effect of the elicitation procedure? Medical Decision Making, 20, 62–71. doi:10.1177/0272989X0002000108.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Taplin, S. H., Barlow, W. E., Ludman, E., MacLehos, R., Meyer, D. M., Seger, D. et al. (2000). Testing reminder and motivational telephone calls to increase screening mammography: A randomized study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 92, 233–242. doi:10.1093/jnci/92.3.233.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Fishman, P. A., Boudreau, D. M., Bonomi, A. E. et al. (2007). Long term outcomes of a trial to increase mammographic breast cancer screening (submitted for publication).

38.

Breen, N., Cronin, K. A., Meissner, H. I., Taplin, S. H., Tangka, F. K., Tiro, J. A. et al. (2007). Reported drop in mammography : Is this cause for concern? Cancer, 109, 2405–2409. doi:10.1002/cncr.22723.PubMedCrossRef

39.

U. S. Census Bureau (unknown). Available at: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/53/5363000.htm. Accessed 11 April 2007.

40.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (unknown). Available at: http://www.nccn.org/patients/patient_gls/_english/_breast/contents.asp. Accessed xx, xxxx.

41.

Torrance, G. W. (1986). Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. Journal of Health Economics, 5, 1–30. doi:10.1016/0167-6296(86)90020-2.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Lloyd, A., Nafees, B., Narewska, J., Dewilde, S., & Watkins, J. (2006). Health state utilities for metastatic breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer, 95, 683–690. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6603326.PubMedCrossRef

43.

U.S. Department of Health Statistics. Washington D.C.

44.

Cullen, J., Schwartz, M. D., Lawrence, W. F., Selby, J. V., & Mandelblatt, J. S. (2004). Short-term impact of cancer prevention and screening activities on quality of life. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22, 943–952. doi:10.1200/JCO.2004.05.191.PubMedCrossRef

45.

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Guidelines for breast cancer screening. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstf/uspsbrca.htm. Accessed xx, xxxx.

46.

American College of Preventive Medicine. Screening mammography for breast cancer: American College of Preventive Medicine practice policy statement. Available at: http://www.acpm.org/breast.htm. Accessed xx, xxxx.

47.

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. doi:10.1177/02729890122062497.PubMedCrossRef

48.

Schleinitz, M. D., DePalo, D., Blume, J., & Stein, M. (2006). Can differences in breast cancer utilities explain disparities in breast cancer care? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21, 1253–1260. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00609.x.PubMedCrossRef

49.

Stiggelbout, A. M., Eijkemans, M. J., Kiebert, G. M., Kievit, J., Leer, J. W., & De Haes, H. J. (1996). The ‘utility’ of the visual analog scale in medical decision making and technology assessment. Is it an alternative to the time trade-off? International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 12, 291–298.PubMedCrossRef

50.

Bennett, K. J., & Torrance, G. W. (1996). Measuring health state preferences and utilities: Rating scale, time trade-off and standard gamble techniques. In B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics of clinical trials (2nd ed., pp. 253–265). Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven.

Titel: Quality of life valuations of mammography screening
Auteurs: Amy E. Bonomi
Denise M. Boudreau
Paul A. Fishman
Evette Ludman
Amy Mohelnitzky
Elizabeth A. Cannon
Deb Seger
Publicatiedatum: 01-06-2008
Uitgeverij: Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 5/2008
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9353-2

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2008

Measuring health-related quality of life for persons with mobility impairments: an enabled version of the short-form 36 (SF-36E)

Quality of life in cancer patients in South Asia: psychometric properties of the Sinhala version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in cancer patients with heterogeneous diagnoses

Content validity in the PROMIS social-health domain: a qualitative analysis of focus-group data

Health-related quality-of-life measures for long-term follow-up in children after major trauma

Symptoms, supportive care needs, and function in cancer patients: how are they related?

The disutility of chronic gout