Recombinant erythropoietin for chemotherapy-related anaemia: Economic value and health-related quality-of-life assessment using direct utility elicitation and discrete choice experiment methods

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 223-237

  Ossa, Diego F ^a,g   Briggs, Andrew ^a,b   McIntosh, Emma ^c   Cowell, Warren ^d   Littlewood, Tim ^e   Sculpher, Mark ^a,f  

^a ICON PLC   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^d ROCHE PRODUCTS LTD   (United Kingdom)

^e JOHN RADCLIFFE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^g Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; RECOMBINANT ERYTHROPOIETIN;

ADULT; AGED; ALLERGIC REACTION; ANEMIA; ARTICLE; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; FATIGUE; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; INFECTION; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCORING SYSTEM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANEMIA; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG THERAPY; ERYTHROPOIETIN, RECOMBINANT; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 33847766566     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200725030-00005     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Marchetti M, Barosi G. Clinical and economic impact of epoetins in cancer care. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22 (16): 1029-45
2. Groopman J, Itri L. Chemotherapy-induced anaemia in adults: incidence and treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91 (19): 1616-34
3. WHO/UNICEF/UNU. Iron deficiency anaemia: assessment, prevention and control. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001 (WHO/NHD/01.3) [online]. Available from URL: http://www.who.int/nut/documents/ ida_assessment_prevention_control.pdf [Accessed 2005 Oct 18]
4. WHO. Nutritional anaemia: report of a WHO scientific group. WHO Technical Report Series No. 405. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1968
5. Bokemeyer C, Ludwig H. Causes of anaemia in cancer patients with emphasis on treatment factors. In: Bokemeyer C, Ludwig H, editors. Anaemia in cancer, Vol 6. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science BV, 2001: 43-54
6. Nowrousian M. Pathophysiology in anaemia in cancer. In: Bokemeyer C, Ludwig H, editors. Anaemia in cancer, Vol 6. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science BV, 2001: 25-42
7. Glaspy J, Bukowski R, Steinberg D, et al. Impact of therapy with epoetin alfa on clinical outcomes in patients with non-myeloid malignancies during cancer chemotherapy in community oncology practice: Procrit Study Group. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15 (3): 1218-34
8. British National Formulary. British National Formulary - British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain September 2006 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.bnf.org/ [Accessed 2007 Jan 31]
9. Boogaerts M, Coiffier B, Kainz C. Impact of epoetin beta on quality of life in patients with malignant disease. Br J Cancer 2002; 88 (7): 988-95
10. Crawford J, Cella D, Cleeland CS, et al. Relationship between changes in hemoglobin level and quality of life during chemotherapy in anemic cancer patients receiving epoetin alfa therapy. Cancer 2002; 95 (4): 888-95
11. Littlewood TJ, Bajetta E, Nortier JW, et al. Effects of epoetin alfa on hematologic parameters and quality of life in cancer patients receiving nonplatinum chemotherapy: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19 (11): 2865-74
12. NICE. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: National Institute of Clinical Excellence, 2004
13. Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socioecon Plann Sci 1976; 10 (3): 129-36
14. Estrin JT, Schocket L, Kregenow R, et al. A retrospective review of blood transfusions in cancer patients with anaemia. Oncologist 1999; 4 (4): 318-24
15. Moullet I, Salles G, Ketterer N, et al. Frequency and significance of anaemia in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients. Ann Oncol 1998; 9 (10): 1109-15
16. Mercuriali F, Inghilleri G. The use of allogeneic blood transfusions in cancer surgery. In: Bokemeyer C, Ludwig H, editors. Anaemia in cancer, Vol 6. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science BV, 2001: 73-83
17. Goodnough L, Skikne B, Brugnara C. Erythropoietin, iron and erythropoiesis. Blood 2000; 96 (3): 823-33
18. Lee SJ, Liljas B, Churchill WH, et al. Perceptions and preferences of autologous blood donors. Transfusion 1998; 38 (8): 757-63
19. Finucane ML, Slovic P, Mertz CK. Public perception of the risk of blood transfusion. Transfusion 2000; 40 (8): 1017-22
20. Glaspy J. The impact of epoetin alfa on quality of life during cancer chemotherapy: a fresh look at an old problem. Semin Hematol 1997; 34 (3): 20-6
21. Demetri G, Kris M, Wade J, et al. Quality-of-life benefit in chemotherapy patients treated with epoetin alfa is independent of disease response or tumour type: results from a prospective community oncology study. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16 (10): 3412-342
22. Bokemeyer C, Ludwig H. The use of rEPO in cancer patients: practical issues. In: Bokemeyer C, Ludwig H, editors. Anaemia in cancer, Vol 6. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science BV, 2001: 167-174
23. Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance G, et al. Guide to design and development of a health-state utility instrumentation. Hamilton (ON): McMaster University CHEPA Working Paper Series, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, 1990
24. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al. Cost-utility analysis. In: Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al., editors. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005: 137-209
25. SPSS version 12.0.1 [computer software]. Chicago (IL): SPSS Inc., 2005
26. Sculpher M, Bryan S, Fry P, et al. Patients' preferences for the management of non-metastatic prostate cancer: discrete choice experiment. BMJ 2004; 328 (7436): 382
27. Taylor SJ, Armour CL. Consumer preference for dinoprostone vaginal gel using stated preference discrete choice modelling. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21 (10): 721-35
28. Viney R, Lancsar E, Louviere J. Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 2002; 2: 319-26
29. Kleinman L, McIntosh E, Ryan M, et al. Willingness to pay for complete symptom relief of gastroesophogeal reflux disease. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162: 1361-6
30. Ryan M, Gerard K. Using discrete choice experiments in health economics: current practice and future prospects. Applied Health Economics and Policy Analysis 2003; 2: 55-64
31. Bryan S, Buxton M, Sheldon R, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the investigation of knee injuries: an investigation of preferences. Health Econ 1998; 7: 595-604
32. Jan S, Mooney G, Ryan M. The use of conjoint analysis to elicit community preferences in public health research: a case study of hospital services in Australia. Aust N Z J Public Health 2000; 24: 64-70
33. Ryan M, Scott DA, Reeves C, et al. Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2001; 5 (5): 1-186
34. McIntosh E, Donaldson C, Ryan M. Recent advances in the methods of cost-benefit analysis in healthcare: matching the art to the science. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15: 357-67
35. McIntosh E, Ryan M. Using discrete choice experiments to derive welfare estimates for the provision of elective surgery: implications of discontinuous preferences. J Econ Psychol 2002; 23: 367-82
36. Sloane NJ. A library of orthogonal arrays [online]. Available from URL: http://www.research.att.com/~njas/oadir/ [Accessed 2004 Jan 13]
37. Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. Preference data consistent with RUT. In: Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD, editors. Stated choice methods: analysis and application. 1st ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000: 25-33
38. Roe B, Boyle KJ, Teisl MF. Using conjoint analysis to derive estimates of compensating variation. J Environ Manage 1996; 31: 145-59
39. LIMDEP, NLOGIT Version 3.0. [econometric computer software]. Plainview (NY): Econometric Software Inc., 2002
40. Ryan M. Deriving welfare measures in discrete choice experiments: a comment to Lancsar and Savage [letter]. Health Econ 2004; 13: 909-12
41. Santos Silva JMC. Deriving welfare measures in discrete choice experiments: a comment to Lancsar and Savage (2) [letter]. Health Econ 2004; 13: 913-8
42. Fieller EC. Some problems on interval estimation with discussion. J R Stat Soc 1954; 16: 175-88
43. Van Nooten F, Brower W. The influence of subjective expectations about length and quality of life on time trade-off answers. Health Econ 2004; 13 (8): 819-23
44. Ortega A, Dranitsaris G, Poudziunas A. What are cancer patients willing to pay for prophylactic epoetin alfa? A cost-benefit analysis. Cancer 1998; 83: 2588-96
45. Jansen SJT, Staggelbout AM, Wakker PP, et al. Patient's utilities for cancer treatments: a study of the chained procedure for the standard gamble and time trade off. Med Decis Making 1998; 18: 391-9
46. Bleichrodt H. A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off utilities and standard gamble utilities. Health Econ 2002; 11 (5): 447-56
47. Bleichrodt H, Pinto JL, Abellan-Perpiñan JM. A consistency test of the time trade-off. J Health Econ 2003; 22 (6): 1037-52
48. Cook J, Richardson J, Street A. A cost-utility analysis of treatment options for gallstone disease: methodological issues and results. Health Econ 1994; 3 (3): 157-68
49. Buckingham JK, Birdsall J, Douglas JG. Comparing three versions of the time tradeoff: time for a change? Med Decis Making 1996; 16 (4): 335-47
50. Carlsson P, Martinsson P. Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics. Health Econ 2003; 12: 281-94
51. Lancsar E, Savage E. Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: inconsistencies between current methods and random utility and welfare theory. Health Econ 2004; 13 (9): 901-7