Comparison of Value Set Based on DCE and/or TTO Data: Scoring for EQ-5D-5L Health States in Japan

AbstractBackgroundThe valuation study of the five-level version of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) involved composite time trade-off (cTTO) and a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The DCE scores must be anchored to the quality-of-life scale from 0 (death) to 1 (full health). Nevertheless, the characteristics of the statistical methods used for converting the EQ-5D-5L DCE results by using TTO information are not yet clearly known.ObjectivesTo present the Japanese DCE value set of the EQ-5D-5L and compare three methods for converting latent DCE values.MethodsThe survey sampled the general population at five locations in Japan. 1098 respondents were stratified by age and sex. To obtain and compare the value sets of the EQ-5D-5L, the cTTO and DCE data were analyzed by a linear mixed model and conditional logit, respectively. The DCE scores were converted to the quality-of-life scale by anchoring to the worst state using cTTO, mapping DCE onto cTTO, and a hybrid model.ResultsThe data from 1026 respondents were analyzed. All the coefficients in the cTTO and DCE value sets were consistent throughout all the analyses. Compared with the cTTO algorithm, the mapping and hybrid methods yielded very similar scoring coefficients. The hybrid model results, however, produced a lower root mean square error and fewer health states with errors exceeding 0.05 than did the other models. The DCE anchored to the worst state overestimated the cTTO scores of almost all the health states.ConclusionsJapanese value sets based on DCE were demonstrated. On comparing the observed cTTO scores, we found that the hybrid model was slightly superior to the simpler methods, including the TTO model

Associations among baseline variables, treatment-related factors and health-related quality of life 2 years after breast cancer surgery

Provision of social support and rehabilitation for patients with physical, mental, and functional problems after cancer treatment is important for long-term health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Effective use of human and financial healthcare resources requires identification of patients requiring rehabilitation. The objectives of the current study were to clarify the patterns of physical and psychosocial recovery over time, to evaluate the associations among baseline variables, treatment-related factors and HRQOL at 6 months, 1, and 2 years after breast cancer surgery, and to identify the significant factors predicting HRQOL at each point. A multicenter longitudinal study was performed to evaluate physical conditions, anxiety, depression, and HRQOL at 1 month (baseline), 6 months, 1, and 2 years after surgery in 196 patients (mean age: 53.3 years old) with early breast cancer and no postoperative recurrence. Physical conditions were evaluated using a patient-reported symptom checklist. HRQOL was rated using the functional assessment of cancer treatment scalegeneral (FACT-G) and the breast cancer subscale (FACTB). Anxiety and depression were rated using the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS). More than 50% of patients had local problems of "tightness", "arm weakness." and "arm lymphedema", and systemic problems of "reduced energy, fatigue, and general weakness" postoperatively. The HRQOL score significantly improved 1 year after surgery, and scores for physical, emotional and functional well-being also increased with time, whereas the score for social well-being was the highest at baseline and decreased with time. Depression and anxiety significantly improved with time. Concomitant disease, marital status, and the presence of a partner, anxiety and depression at baseline, pathological lymph node involvement, and adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy were significant factors predicting FACT-G scores at 6 months, 1, and 2 years after surgery. Depression at baseline was a strong predictor of HRQOL up to 2 years after surgery. These results suggest that physical rehabilitation is required for tightness and lymphedema to improve long-term postoperative physical function. A further study of psychosocial interventions is required to improve depression and social well-being after breast cancer surgery

Development of a Japanese version of the BREAST-Q and the traditional psychometric test of the mastectomy module for the assessment of HRQOL and patient satisfaction following breast surgery

BACKGROUND:　 An understanding of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is of utmost importance in both oncological and esthetic breast surgery. The BREAST-Q is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure that investigates HRQOL and patient satisfaction before and after breast surgery. The aim of this study was to develop a Japanese version of the BREAST-Q including the mastectomy module, the reconstruction module, the augmentation module and the reduction/mastopexy module, and to assess the psychometric properties of the mastectomy module among Japanese women.　 METHODS:　 The Japanese version of the BREAST-Q was developed through forward translation, backward translation and patient testing. Traditional psychometric testing of the mastectomy module was administered to 45 post-mastectomy patients.　 RESULTS:　 The mastectomy, reconstruction, augmentation and reduction/mastopexy modules were formally developed into Japanese. Despite cultural difference between Japanese women and original target population, the contents were considered to be valid among Japanese woman. With the exception of the sexual well-being subscale, good reliability and validity were evident for the mastectomy module (Test-retest reliability 0.76-0.95, Chronbach's alpha coefficient 0.77-0.98).　 CONCLUSIONS:　 The BREAST-Q Japanese version is a useful PRO measure for investigating the impact of breast surgery on HRQOL and patient satisfaction. Further validation in younger Japanese women is needed to determine the usefulness of the sexual well-being subscale

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Capecitabine Compared with Bolus 5-Fluorouracil/l-Leucovorin for the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer in Japan

Objective: A cost-effectiveness analysis of oral capecitabine versus intravenous bolus 5-fluorouracil/l-leucovorin (FU/LV) as adjuvant therapy in patients with stage 3 colon cancer was performed from a Japanese healthcare payer perspective. Methods: Adjuvant therapy comprised 24 weeks of treatment with either oral capecitabine 1250 mg/m twice daily on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle or intravenous bolus FU 500 mg/m and LV 250 mg/m weekly for 6 weeks of an 8-week cycle (Roswell Park regimen). The analysis comprised short-term (1 year after initiation of adjuvant therapy) and long-term (up to 15 years) components. The long-term analysis involved a three-state (disease-free, recurrence and death) Markov model. Estimates for transition probabilities, costs and utilities were derived from the X-ACT trial, a Japanese phase II trial, and other published sources. Cost estimates were considered from the perspective of a healthcare payer. Costs were expressed in Japanese Yen (¥), year 2007 values. A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and outcomes. Cost effectiveness was expressed as a cost per QALY. The effects of uncertainty were explored through one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: In the 1-year analysis, direct costs were ¥440 000 ($US4000) less per patient with capecitabine than with FU/LV. In the long-term analysis, differences between treatments in direct medical costs ranged from ¥470 000 ($US4300) to ¥580 000 ($US5300) depending on the time horizon used. Capecitabine was also projected to increase the number of QALYs compared with FU/LV. The sensitivity analysis suggested that the model outcome was robust. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis estimate of capecitabine being the dominant regimen was 96.6% at a zero willingness to pay. Direct costs remained lower with capecitabine if the price of generic LV was ≥50% of the branded product. Conclusion: This analysis suggests that capecitabine improves health outcomes and lowers direct costs compared with bolus FU/LV (i.e. dominant treatment strategy) when used as adjuvant therapy in patients with stage 3 colon cancer in Japan.