EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Community- and Choice-Based Health State Utility Values for Lung Cancer

Erik F. Blom (), Kevin ten Haaf and Harry J. Koning
Additional contact information
Erik F. Blom: Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam
Kevin ten Haaf: Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam
Harry J. Koning: Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam

PharmacoEconomics, 2020, vol. 38, issue 11, No 4, 1187-1200

Abstract: Abstract Background Using appropriate health state utility values (HSUVs) is critical for economic evaluation of new lung cancer interventions, such as low-dose computed tomography screening and immunotherapy. Therefore, we provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of community- and choice-based HSUVs for lung cancer. Methods On 6 March 2017, we conducted a systematic search of the following databases: Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, Google Scholar, and the School of Health and Related Research Health Utility Database. The search was updated on 17 April 2019. Studies reporting mean or median lung cancer-specific HSUVs including a measure of variance were included and assessed for relevance and validity. Studies with high relevance (i.e. community- and choice-based) were further analysed. Mean HSUVs were pooled using random-effects models for all stages, stages I–II, and stages III–IV. For studies with a control group, we calculated the disutility due to lung cancer. A sensitivity analysis included only the methodologically most comparable studies (i.e. using the EQ-5D instrument and matching tariff). Subgroup analyses were conducted by time to death, histology, sex, age, treatment modality, treatment line, and progression status. Results We identified and analysed 27 studies of high relevance. The pooled HSUV was 0.68 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61–0.75) for all stages, 0.78 (95% CI 0.70–0.86) for stages I–II, and 0.69 (95% CI 0.65–0.73) for stages III–IV (p = 0.02 vs. stage I–II). Heterogeneity was present in each pooled analysis (p

Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-020-00947-x 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:38:y:2020:i:11:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00947-x

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

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00947-x

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 ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-20
Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:11:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00947-x