Australian Utility Weights for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument Derived from the Cancer-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30

Madeleine T. King (), Rosalie Viney (), A. Simon Pickard, Donna Rowen, Neil K. Aaronson, John Brazier (), David Cella, Daniel S. J. Costa, Peter M. Fayers, Georg Kemmler, Helen McTaggart-Cowen, Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber, Stuart Peacock, Deborah J. Street, Tracey A. Young and Richard Norman
Additional contact information
Madeleine T. King: University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, Quality of Life Office
A. Simon Pickard: University of Illinois at Chicago
Donna Rowen: University of Sheffield
Neil K. Aaronson: The Netherlands Cancer Institute
David Cella: Northwestern University
Daniel S. J. Costa: University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, Quality of Life Office
Peter M. Fayers: University of Aberdeen
Georg Kemmler: Innsbruck Medical University
Helen McTaggart-Cowen: Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control and British Columbia Cancer Agency
Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber: University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, Quality of Life Office
Stuart Peacock: Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control and British Columbia Cancer Agency
Deborah J. Street: University of Technology Sydney (UTS)
Tracey A. Young: University of Sheffield
Richard Norman: Curtin University

PharmacoEconomics, 2018, vol. 36, issue 2, No 9, 225-238

Abstract: Abstract Background The EORTC QLU-C10D is a new multi-attribute utility instrument derived from the widely used cancer-specific quality-of-life (QOL) questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30. The QLU-C10D contains ten dimensions (Physical, Role, Social and Emotional Functioning; Pain, Fatigue, Sleep, Appetite, Nausea, Bowel Problems), each with four levels. To be used in cost-utility analysis, country-specific valuation sets are required. Objective The aim of this study was to provide Australian utility weights for the QLU-C10D. Methods An Australian online panel was quota-sampled to ensure population representativeness by sex and age (≥ 18 years). Participants completed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) consisting of 16 choice-pairs. Each pair comprised two QLU-C10D health states plus life expectancy. Data were analysed using conditional logistic regression, parameterised to fit the quality-adjusted life-year framework. Utility weights were calculated as the ratio of each QOL dimension-level coefficient to the coefficient on life expectancy. Results A total of 1979 panel members opted in, 1904 (96%) completed at least one choice-pair, and 1846 (93%) completed all 16 choice-pairs. Dimension weights were generally monotonic: poorer levels within each dimension were generally associated with greater utility decrements. The dimensions that impacted most on choice were, in order, Physical Functioning, Pain, Role Functioning and Emotional Functioning. Oncology-relevant dimensions with moderate impact were Nausea and Bowel Problems. Fatigue, Trouble Sleeping and Appetite had relatively small impact. The value of the worst health state was -0.096, somewhat worse than death. Conclusions This study provides the first country-specific value set for the QLU-C10D, which can facilitate cost-utility analyses when applied to data collected with the EORTC QLQ-C30, prospectively and retrospectively.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-017-0582-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0582-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0582-5

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().