Mapping the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ H&N35 to the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D for papillary thyroid carcinoma

PURPOSE

Empirical evidence for the EORTC QLQ C30 scale in thyroid cancer mapping algorithms has not been found in China, which limits the cost-utility analysis of patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) population. We developed mapping algorithms that use the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ H&N35 to predict EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D health utility scores for PTC patients.

METHODS

Data from 1050 Chinese PTC patients who completed the EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ H&N35, EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D instruments were collected. Direct mapping (OLS, Tobit, Betamix) and indirect mapping functions (Order Probit) were used to estimate algorithms. The goodness-of-fit of mapping performance was assessed by MAE, RMSE, AIC, BIC, AE, and ICC. A fivefold cross-validation and random sample validation approach were used to test the stability of the models.

RESULTS

The mean EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D utility scores were 0.8704 and 0.6368, respectively. We recommend the Betamix model for the EQ-5D-5L (MAE = 0.0363, RMSE = 0.0505, AIC = -3458.73, BIC = -3096.91, AE > 0.05(%) = 48.38, AE > 0.1(%) = 8.67, ICC = 0.8288 for the full sample dataset) and the Betamix model for the SF-6D (MAE = 0.0328, RMSE = 0.0417, AIC = -2788.91, BIC = -2605.51, AE > 0.05(%) = 42.76, AE > 0.1(%) = 3.62, ICC = 0.8657 for the full sample dataset), with EORTC QLQ-C30 all items, QLQ H&N35 all items, age and gender as the predicted variables showing the best performance.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of preference-based quality of life tools, the mapping algorithms reported here are effective alternative for predicting the health utility of PTC patients, contributing to the cost-utility analysis studies.

Using a Sample Size Calculation Framework for Clinical Prediction Models When Developing and Selecting Mapping Algorithms Based on Linear Regression

PURPOSE

To propose using a framework for calculating the sample size for clinical prediction models when developing and selecting mapping algorithms from a health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) measure onto the score of a preference-based measure (PBM) using linear regression.

METHODS

The framework was summarized for health economics researchers. Mapping studies that mapped the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 onto the EQ-5D-3L index using linear regression were evaluated in terms of sample size. The required sample size for each study was calculated using 4 criteria: global shrinkage factor ≥ 0.9, difference between the apparent and adjusted R2 ≤ 0.05, multiplicative margin of error in the estimated residual standard deviation ≤ 1.1, and absolute margin of error in the estimated model intercept ≤ 0.025.

RESULTS

Ten mapping studies were identified. The information required to calculate the sample size was successfully extracted from previous mapping studies. Four of 10 mapping studies did not have sufficient sample sizes.

LIMITATIONS

Further extension of this framework to other regression approaches used in mapping studies is necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

The sample size should be considered when developing and selecting a mapping algorithm based on linear regression.

HIGHLIGHTS

No recommendation or guidance is available for the sample size to develop and select a mapping algorithm from a health-related quality-of-life measure onto the score of a preference-based measure.This research proposes using a framework for calculating the sample size for clinical prediction models in sample size consideration for mapping algorithms using linear regression.A survey showed that the information required to calculate the sample size could be successfully extracted from previous mapping studies and that 4 of 10 mapping studies did not have sufficient sample sizes.

Mapping the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) to EQ-5D-5L

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) is gaining popularity as healthcare system funders increasingly seek value-based care. However, it is limited in its ability to estimate utilities and thus inform economic evaluations. This study develops the first mapping algorithm for estimating EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) utilities from PROMIS-29 responses using a large dataset and through extensive comparisons between econometric models.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted to collect responses to PROMIS-29 and EQ-5D-5L from the general Australian population (N = 3013). Direct and indirect mapping methods were explored, including linear regression, Tobit, generalised linear model, censored regression model, beta regression (Betamix), the adjusted limited dependent variable mixture model (ALDVMM) and generalised ordered logit. The most robust model was selected by assessing the performance based on average ten-fold cross-validation geometric mean absolute error and geometric mean squared error, the predicted mean, maximum and minimum utilities, as well as the fitting across the entire distribution.

RESULTS

The direct approach using ALDVMM was considered the preferred model based on lowest geometric mean absolute error and geometric mean squared error in cross-validation (0.0882, 0.0299) and its superiority in predicting the actual observed mean, full health states and lower utility extremes. The robustness and precision in prediction across the entire distribution of utilities with ALDVMM suggest it is an accurate and valid mapping algorithm. Moreover, the suggested mapping algorithm outperformed previously published algorithms using Australian data, indicating the validity of this model for economic evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed a robust algorithm to estimate EQ-5D-5L utilities from PROMIS-29. Consistent with the recent literature, the ALDVMM outperformed all other econometric models considered in this study, suggesting that the mixture models have relatively better performance and are an ideal candidate model for mapping.

Indirect and Direct Mapping of the Cancer-Specific EORTC QLQ-C30 onto EQ-5D-5L Utility Scores

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop a response mapping algorithm to predict EQ-5D-5L utilities from European Organisation for Research and Treatment Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) scores and compare performance with direct mapping approaches to identify the best performing algorithm.

METHODS

The Multi-Instrument Comparison dataset contains responses to both the EQ-5D-5L and QLQ-C30 questionnaires from 692 individuals with a broad range of cancers. Response mapping was conducted, fitting ordered logistic regressions to predict response levels for each of the five EQ-5D dimensions and utilities were predicted using the US and Japanese EQ-5D-5L value sets to test the algorithm performance. Various direct mapping models were fitted: ordinary least squares, tobit, two-part (TPM), adjusted limited dependent variable mixture and beta mixture models. Model assessment and recommendations regarding the best mapping algorithm was based on goodness-of-fit statistics, predictive ability (measures of error, distribution of predicted utilities) and in sample cross-validation.

RESULTS

The response mapping model performed well in terms of predictive ability and measurement error using the US or Japanese value set, with mean absolute error ranging from 0.0708 to 0.0988, and comparably to the TPM, which was the best performing direct algorithm.

CONCLUSION

The developed mapping algorithms enable the prediction of EQ-5D-5L utilities from QLQ-C30 scores when EQ-5D-5L data have not been directly collected in clinical trials. The response mapping model offers the possibility of predicting EQ-5D-5L utility values using any national value set and can be generalised to multiple countries and oncology settings.

Mapping the EORTC QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D-3L in patients with breast cancer

Background

The types of outcomes measured collected in clinical studies and those required for cost-effectiveness analysis often differ. Decision makers routinely use quality adjusted life years (QALYs) to compare the benefits and costs of treatments across different diseases and treatments using a common metric. QALYs can be calculated using preference-based measures (PBMs) such as EQ-5D-3L, but clinical studies often focus on objective clinician or laboratory measured outcomes and non-preference-based patient outcomes, such as QLQ-C30. We model the relationship between the generic, preference-based EQ-5D-3L and the cancer specific quality of life questionnaire, QLQ-C30 in patients with breast cancer. This will result in a mapping that allows users to convert QLQ-C30 scores into EQ-5D-3L scores for the purposes of cost-effectiveness analysis or economic evaluation.

Methods

We use data from a randomized trial of 602 patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer provided 3766 EQ-5D-3L observations. Direct mapping using adjusted, limited dependent variable mixture models (ALDVMM) is compared to a random effects linear regression and indirect mapping using seemingly unrelated ordered probit models. EQ-5D-3L was estimated as a function of the summary scales of the QLQ-C30 and other patient characteristics.

Results

A four component mixture model outperformed other models in terms of summary fit statistics. A close fit to the observed data was observed across the range of disease severity. Simulated data from the model closely aligned to the original data and showed that mapping did not significantly underestimate uncertainty. In the simulated data, 22.15% were equal to 1 compared to 21.93% in the original data. Variance was 0.0628 in the simulated data versus 0.0693 in the original data. The preferred mapping is provided in Excel and Stata files for the ease of users.

Conclusion

A four component adjusted mixture model provides reliable, non-biased estimates of EQ-5D-3L from the QLQ-C30, to link clinical studies to economic evaluation of health technologies for breast cancer. This work adds to a growing body of literature demonstrating the appropriateness of mixture model based approaches in mapping.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08964-5.

Health utilities for non-melanoma skin cancers and pre-cancerous lesions: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSCs) are common and consume many healthcare resources. A health utility is a single preference-based value for assessing health-related quality of life, which can be used in economic evaluations. There are scarce data on health utilities for NMSCs.

OBJECTIVES

Using a systematic review approach, we synthesized the current data on NMSC-related health utilities.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies of NMSC-related health utilities was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Data were extracted based on the protocol and a quality assessment was performed for each study.

RESULTS

The protocol resulted in 16 studies, involving 121 621 participants. Mean utility values across the studies ranged from 0.56 to 1 for undifferentiated NMSC, 0.84 to 1 for actinic keratosis, 0.45 to 1 for squamous cell carcinoma, and 0.67 to 1 for basal cell carcinoma. There was considerable variability in utilities by type of cancer, stage of diagnosis, time to treatment, treatment modality, and quality of life instrument or method. Utility values were predominantly based on the EuroQol 5-dimension instrument and ranged from 0.45 to 0.96, while other measurement methods produced values ranging from 0.67 to 1. Lower utility values were observed for advanced cancers and for the time period during and immediately after treatment, after which values gradually returned to pre-treatment levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Most utility values clustered around relatively high values of 0.8 to 1, suggesting small decrements in quality of life associated with most NMSCs and their precursors. Variability in utilities indicates that careful characterization is required for measures to be used in economic evaluations.

Evaluating cost-effectiveness in the management of neuroendocrine neoplasms

The rapid evolution of novel, costly therapies for neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN) warrants formal high-quality cost-effectiveness evaluation. Costs of individual investigations and therapies are high; and examples are presented. We aimed to review the last ten years of standalone health economic evaluations in NEN. Comparing to published standards, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database were searched for health economic evaluations (HEEs) in NEN published between 2010 and October 2019. Of 12 economic evaluations, 11 considered exclusively pharmacological treatment (3 studies of SSAs, 7 studies of sunitinib, everolimus and/or 177Lu-DOTATATE and 1 study of telotristat ethyl) and 1 compared surgery with intraarterial therapy. 7 studies of pharmacological treatment had placebo or best supportive care as the only comparator. There remains a paucity of economic evaluations in NEN with the majority industry funded. Most HEEs reviewed did not meet published health economic criteria used to assess quality. Lack of cost data collected from patient populations remains a significant factor in HEEs where clinical expert opinion is still often substituted. Further research utilizing high-quality effectiveness data and rigorous applied health economic analysis is needed.

Selective internal radiation therapies for unresectable early-, intermediate- or advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review, network meta-analysis and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common type of primary liver cancer. Treatment choice is dependent on underlying liver dysfunction and cancer stage. Treatment options include conventional transarterial therapies for patients with intermediate-stage disease and systemic therapy [e.g. sorafenib (Nexavar®; Bayer plc, Leverkusen, Germany)] for patients with advanced-stage disease. Selective internal radiation therapies deliver radiation to liver tumours via microspheres that are injected into the hepatic artery. There are three selective internal radiation therapies: TheraSphere™ [BTG Ltd, London, UK (now Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA)], SIR-Spheres® (Sirtex Medical Ltd, Woburn, MA, USA) and QuiremSpheres® (Quirem Medical BV, Deventer, the Netherlands).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of selective internal radiation therapies for treating patients with unresectable early-, intermediate- or advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

A search was undertaken to identify clinical effectiveness literature relating to selective internal radiation therapies and relevant comparators for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Studies were critically appraised and summarised. The network of evidence was mapped to estimate the relative effectiveness of the different selective internal radiation therapies and comparator treatments. An economic analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included in the clinical effectiveness review. Two large randomised controlled trials rated as having a low risk of bias [SARAH: Vilgrain V, Pereira H, Assenat E, Guiu B, Ilonca AD, Pageaux GP, et al. Efficacy and safety of selective internal radiotherapy with yttrium-90 resin microspheres compared with sorafenib in locally advanced and inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (SARAH): an open-label randomised controlled Phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017;18:1624-36; and SIRveNIB: Chow PKH, Gandhi M, Tan SB, Khin MW, Khasbazar A, Ong J, et al. SIRveNIB: selective internal radiation therapy versus sorafenib in Asia-Pacific patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:1913-21] found no significant difference in overall survival or progression-free survival between SIR-Spheres and sorafenib (systemic therapy) in an advanced population, despite greater tumour response in the SIR-Spheres arm of both trials. There were some concerns regarding generalisability of the SARAH and SIRveNIB trials to UK practice. All other studies of SIR-Spheres, TheraSphere or QuiremSpheres were either rated as being at a high risk of bias or caused some concerns regarding bias. A network meta-analysis was conducted in adults with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma who had Child-Pugh class A liver cirrhosis and were ineligible for conventional transarterial therapies. The analysis included the SARAH and SIRveNIB trials as well as a trial comparing lenvatinib (Kisplyx®; Eisai Ltd, Tokyo, Japan) (systemic therapy) with sorafenib. There were no meaningful differences in overall survival between any of the treatments. The base-case economic analysis suggested that TheraSphere may be cost-saving relative to both SIR-Spheres and QuiremSpheres. However, incremental cost differences between TheraSphere and SIR-Spheres were small. In a fully incremental analysis, which included confidential Patient Access Scheme discounts, lenvatinib was the most cost-effective treatment and dominated all selective internal radiation therapies. In pairwise comparisons of sorafenib with each selective internal radiation therapy, sorafenib also dominated all selective internal radiation therapies.

LIMITATIONS

The existing evidence cannot provide decision-makers with clear guidance on the comparative effectiveness of treatments in early- and intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma or on the efficacy of TheraSphere or QuiremSpheres.

CONCLUSIONS

In the advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma population, two large randomised trials have shown that SIR-Spheres have similar clinical effectiveness to sorafenib. None of the selective internal radiation therapies was cost-effective, being more costly and less effective than lenvatinib, both at list price and with Patient Access Scheme discounts.

FUTURE WORK

Future studies may wish to include early- and intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma patients and the low tumour burden/albumin-bilirubin 1 subgroup of advanced-stage patients. Future high-quality studies evaluating alternative selective internal radiation therapies would be beneficial.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019128383.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 48. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Does linear equating improve prediction in mapping? Crosswalking MacNew onto EQ-5D-5L value sets

PURPOSE

Preference-based measures are essential for producing quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) that are widely used for economic evaluations. In the absence of such measures, mapping algorithms can be applied to estimate utilities from disease-specific measures. This paper aims to develop mapping algorithms between the MacNew Heart Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (MacNew) instrument and the English and the US-based EQ-5D-5L value sets.

METHODS

Individuals with heart disease were recruited from six countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, Norway, UK and the US in 2011/12. Both parametric and non-parametric statistical techniques were applied to estimate mapping algorithms that predict utilities for MacNew scores from EQ-5D-5L value sets. The optimal algorithm for each country-specific value set was primarily selected based on root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), and r-squared. Leave-one-out cross-validation was conducted to test the generalizability of each model.

RESULTS

For both the English and the US value sets, the one-inflated beta regression model consistently performed best in terms of all criteria. Similar results were observed for the cross-validation results. The preferred model explained 59 and 60% for the English and the US value set, respectively. Linear equating provided predicted values that were equivalent to observed values.

CONCLUSIONS

The preferred mapping function enables to predict utilities for MacNew data from the EQ-5D-5L value sets recently developed in England and the US with better accuracy. This allows studies, which have included the MacNew to be used in cost-utility analyses and thus, the comparison of services with interventions across the health system.

The validation of published utility mapping algorithms: an example of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D in non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Mapping algorithms can be used to generate health state utilities when a preference-based instrument is not included in a clinical study. Our aim was to investigate the external validity of published mapping algorithms in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D instruments and to propose methodology for validating any mapping algorithms.

METHODS

We conducted a targeted literature review to identify published mappings, then applied these to data from the osimertinib clinical trial programme. Performance of the algorithms was evaluated using the mean absolute error, root mean squared error, and graphical techniques for the observed versus predicted EQ-5D utilities. These statistics were also calculated across the range of utility values (as well as ordinary least squares and quantile regression), to investigate how the mappings fitted across all values, not simply around the mean utility.

RESULTS

Three algorithms developed in NSCLC were identified. The algorithm based on response mapping (Young et al., 2015) fitted the validation dataset across the range of observed values with similar fit statistics to the original publication (overall MAE of 0.087 vs 0.134). The two algorithms based on beta-binomial models presented a poor fit to both the mean and distribution of utility values (MAE 0.176, 0.178).

CONCLUSIONS

The validation of mapping algorithms is key to demonstrating their generalisability beyond the original dataset, particularly across the range of plausible utility values (not just the mean) - perceived patient similarity being insufficient. The identified algorithm from Young et al. performed well across the range of EORTC scores observed, and thus appears most suitable for use in other studies of NSCLC patients.

Treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma in the elderly: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A glioblastoma is a fatal type of brain tumour for which the standard of care is maximum surgical resection followed by chemoradiotherapy, when possible. Age is an important consideration in this disease, as older age is associated with shorter survival and a higher risk of treatment-related toxicity.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the most effective and best-tolerated approaches for the treatment of elderly people with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. To summarise current evidence for the incremental resource use, utilities, costs and cost-effectiveness associated with these approaches.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase to 3 April 2019, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED) up to database closure. We handsearched clinical trial registries and selected neuro-oncology society conference proceedings from the past five years.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials (RCTs) of treatments for glioblastoma in elderly people. We defined 'elderly' as 70+ years but included studies defining 'elderly' as over 65+ years if so reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for study selection and data extraction. Where sufficient data were available, treatment options were compared in a network meta-analysis (NMA) using Stata software (version 15.1). For outcomes with insufficient data for NMA, pairwise meta-analysis were conducted in RevMan. The GRADE approach was used to grade the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs involving approximately 1818 participants. Six were conducted exclusively among elderly people (either defined as 65 years or older or 70 years or older) with newly diagnosed glioblastoma, the other six reported data for an elderly subgroup among a broader age range of participants. Most participants were capable of self-care. Study quality was commonly undermined by lack of outcome assessor blinding and attrition. NMA was only possible for overall survival; other analyses were pair-wise meta-analyses or narrative syntheses. Seven trials contributed to the NMA for overall survival, with interventions including supportive care only (one trial arm); hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT40; four trial arms); standard radiotherapy (RT60; five trial arms); temozolomide (TMZ; three trial arms); chemoradiotherapy (CRT; three trial arms); bevacizumab with chemoradiotherapy (BEV_CRT; one trial arm); and bevacizumab with radiotherapy (BEV_RT). Compared with supportive care only, NMA evidence suggested that all treatments apart from BEV_RT prolonged survival to some extent. Overall survival High-certainty evidence shows that CRT prolongs overall survival (OS) compared with RT40 (hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.80) and low-certainty evidence suggests that CRT may prolong overall survival compared with TMZ (TMZ versus CRT: HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.98). Low-certainty evidence also suggests that adding BEV to CRT may make little or no difference (BEV_CRT versus CRT: HR 0.83, 95% CrI 0.48 to 1.44). We could not compare the survival effects of CRT with different radiotherapy fractionation schedules (60 Gy/30 fractions and 40 Gy/15 fractions) due to a lack of data. When treatments were ranked according to their effects on OS, CRT ranked higher than TMZ, RT and supportive care only, with the latter ranked last. BEV plus RT was the only treatment for which there was no clear benefit in OS over supportive care only.   One trial comparing tumour treating fields (TTF) plus adjuvant chemotherapy (TTF_AC) with adjuvant chemotherapy alone could not be included in the NMA as participants were randomised after receiving concomitant chemoradiotherapy, not before. Findings from the trial suggest that the intervention probably improves overall survival in this selected patient population. We were unable to perform NMA for other outcomes due to insufficient data. Pairwise analyses were conducted for the following. Quality of life Moderate-certainty narrative evidence suggests that overall, there may be little difference in QoL between TMZ and RT, except for discomfort from communication deficits, which are probably more common with RT (1 study, 306 participants, P = 0.002). Data on QoL for other comparisons were sparse, partly due to high dropout rates, and the certainty of the evidence tended to be low or very low. Progression-free survival High-certainty evidence shows that CRT increases time to disease progression compared with RT40 (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.61); moderate-certainty evidence suggests that RT60 probably increases time to disease progression compared with supportive care only (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.46), and that BEV_RT probably increases time to disease progression compared with RT40 alone (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.78). Evidence for other treatment comparisons was of low- or very low-certainty. Severe adverse events Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that TMZ probably increases the risk of grade 3+ thromboembolic events compared with RT60 (risk ratio (RR) 2.74, 95% CI 1.26 to 5.94; participants = 373; studies = 1) and also the risk of grade 3+ neutropenia, lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia. Moderate-certainty evidence also suggests that CRT probably increases the risk of grade 3+ neutropenia, leucopenia and thrombocytopenia compared with hypofractionated RT alone. Adding BEV to CRT probably increases the risk of thromboembolism (RR 16.63, 95% CI 1.00 to 275.42; moderate-certainty evidence). Economic evidence There is a paucity of economic evidence regarding the management of newly diagnosed glioblastoma in the elderly. Only one economic evaluation on two short course radiotherapy regimen (25 Gy versus 40 Gy) was identified and its findings were considered unreliable.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For elderly people with glioblastoma who are self-caring, evidence suggests that CRT prolongs survival compared with RT and may prolong overall survival compared with TMZ alone. For those undergoing RT or TMZ therapy, there is probably little difference in QoL overall. Systemic anti-cancer treatments TMZ and BEV carry a higher risk of severe haematological and thromboembolic events and CRT is probably associated with a higher risk of these events. Current evidence provides little justification for using BEV in elderly patients outside a clinical trial setting. Whilst the novel TTF device appears promising, evidence on QoL and tolerability is needed in an elderly population. QoL and economic assessments of CRT versus TMZ and RT are needed. More high-quality economic evaluations are needed, in which a broader scope of costs (both direct and indirect) and outcomes should be included.

Cost Effectiveness of Interval Cytoreductive Surgery With Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Stage III Ovarian Cancer on the Basis of a Randomized Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

In the randomized open-label phase III OVHIPEC trial, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) improved recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with stage III ovarian cancer. We studied the cost effectiveness of the addition of HIPEC to interval CRS in patients with ovarian cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We constructed a Markov health-state transition model to measure costs and clinical outcomes. Transition probabilities were derived from the OVHIPEC trial by fitting survival distributions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as euros per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), was calculated from a Dutch societal perspective, with a time horizon of 10 years. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the decision uncertainty.

RESULTS

Total health care costs were €70,046 (95% credibility interval [CrI], €64,016 to €76,661) for interval CRS compared with €85,791 (95% CrI, €78,766 to €93,935) for interval CRS plus HIPEC. The mean QALY in the interval CRS group was 2.12 (95% CrI, 1.66 to 2.64 QALYs) and 2.68 (95% CrI, 2.11 to 3.28 QALYs) in the interval CRS plus HIPEC group. The ICER amounted to €28,299/QALY. In univariable sensitivity analysis, the utility of recurrence-free survival and the number of days in the hospital affected the calculated ICER most.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of the trial data, treatment with interval CRS and HIPEC in patients with stage III ovarian cancer was accompanied by a substantial gain in QALYs. The ICER is below the willingness-to-pay threshold in the Netherlands, indicating interval CRS and HIPEC is cost effective for this patient population. These results lend additional support for reimbursing the costs of treating these patients with interval CRS and HIPEC in countries with comparable health care systems.

An Updated Systematic Review of Studies Mapping (or Cross-Walking) Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life to Generic Preference-Based Measures to Generate Utility Values

BACKGROUND

Mapping is an increasingly common method used to predict instrument-specific preference-based health-state utility values (HSUVs) from data obtained from another health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measure. There have been several methodological developments in this area since a previous review up to 2007.

OBJECTIVE

To provide an updated review of all mapping studies that map from HRQoL measures to target generic preference-based measures (EQ-5D measures, SF-6D, HUI measures, QWB, AQoL measures, 15D/16D/17D, CHU-9D) published from January 2007 to October 2018.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of English language articles using a variety of approaches: searching electronic and utilities databases, citation searching, targeted journal and website searches.

STUDY SELECTION

Full papers of studies that mapped from one health measure to a target preference-based measure using formal statistical regression techniques.

DATA EXTRACTION

Undertaken by four authors using predefined data fields including measures, data used, econometric models and assessment of predictive ability.

RESULTS

There were 180 papers with 233 mapping functions in total. Mapping functions were generated to obtain EQ-5D-3L/EQ-5D-5L-EQ-5D-Y (n = 147), SF-6D (n = 45), AQoL-4D/AQoL-8D (n = 12), HUI2/HUI3 (n = 13), 15D (n = 8) CHU-9D (n = 4) and QWB-SA (n = 4) HSUVs. A large number of different regression methods were used with ordinary least squares (OLS) still being the most common approach (used ≥ 75% times within each preference-based measure). The majority of studies assessed the predictive ability of the mapping functions using mean absolute or root mean squared errors (n = 192, 82%), but this was lower when considering errors across different categories of severity (n = 92, 39%) and plots of predictions (n = 120, 52%).

CONCLUSIONS

The last 10 years has seen a substantial increase in the number of mapping studies and some evidence of advancement in methods with consideration of models beyond OLS and greater reporting of predictive ability of mapping functions.