United States Value Set for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Eight Dimensions (FACT-8D), a Cancer-Specific Preference-Based Quality of Life Instrument.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a value set reflecting the United States (US) general population's preferences for health states described by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) eight-dimensions preference-based multi-attribute utility instrument (FACT-8D), derived from the FACT-General cancer-specific health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) questionnaire. METHODS: A US online panel was quota-sampled to achieve a general population sample representative by sex, age (≥ 18 years), race and ethnicity. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to value health states. The valuation task involved choosing between pairs of health states (choice-sets) described by varying levels of the FACT-8D HRQL dimensions and survival (life-years). The DCE included 100 choice-sets; each respondent was randomly allocated 16 choice-sets. Data were analysed using conditional logit regression parameterized to fit the quality-adjusted life-year framework, weighted for sociodemographic variables that were non-representative of the US general population. Preference weights were calculated as the ratio of HRQL-level coefficients to the survival coefficient. RESULTS: 2562 panel members opted in, 2462 (96%) completed at least one choice-set and 2357 (92%) completed 16 choice-sets. Pain and nausea were associated with the largest utility weights, work and sleep had more moderate utility weights, and sadness, worry and support had the smallest utility weights. Within dimensions, more severe HRQL levels were generally associated with larger weights. A preference-weighting algorithm to estimate US utilities from responses to the FACT-General questionnaire was generated. The worst health state's value was -0.33. CONCLUSIONS: This value set provides US population utilities for health states defined by the FACT-8D for use in evaluating oncology treatments.

QLU-C10D: a health state classification system for a multi-attribute utility measure based on the EORTC QLQ-C30.

PURPOSE: To derive a health state classification system (HSCS) from the cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire, the EORTC QLQ-C30, as the basis for a multi-attribute utility instrument. METHODS: The conceptual model for the HSCS was based on the established domain structure of the QLQ-C30. Several criteria were considered to select a subset of dimensions and items for the HSCS. Expert opinion and patient input informed a priori selection of key dimensions. Psychometric criteria were assessed via secondary analysis of a pooled dataset comprising HRQOL and clinical data from 2616 patients from eight countries and a range of primary cancer sites, disease stages, and treatments. We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess the conceptual model's robustness and generalisability. We assessed item floor effects (>75 % observations at lowest score), disordered item response thresholds, coverage of the latent variable and differential item function using Rasch analysis. We calculated effect sizes for known group comparisons based on disease stage and responsiveness to change. Seventy-nine cancer patients assessed the relative importance of items within dimensions. RESULTS: CFA supported the conceptual model and its generalisability across primary cancer sites. After considering all criteria, 12 items were selected representing 10 dimensions: physical functioning (mobility), role functioning, social functioning, emotional functioning, pain, fatigue, sleep, appetite, nausea, bowel problems. CONCLUSIONS: The HSCS created from QLQ-C30 items is known as the EORTC Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 dimensions (QLU-C10D). The next phase of the QLU-C10D's development involves valuation studies, currently planned or being conducted across the globe.

Using a discrete choice experiment to value the QLU-C10D: feasibility and sensitivity to presentation format.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to value health states within the QLU-C10D, a utility instrument derived from the QLQ-C30, and to assess clarity, difficulty, and respondent preference between two presentation formats. METHODS: We ran a DCE valuation task in an online panel (N = 430). Respondents answered 16 choice pairs; in half of these, differences between dimensions were highlighted, and in the remainder, common dimensions were described in text and differing attributes were tabulated. To simplify the cognitive task, only four of the QLU-C10D's ten dimensions differed per choice set. We assessed difficulty and clarity of the valuation task with Likert-type scales, and respondents were asked which format they preferred. We analysed the DCE data by format with a conditional logit model and used Chi-squared tests to compare other responses by format. Semi-structured telephone interviews (N = 8) explored respondents' cognitive approaches to the valuation task. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-nine individuals were recruited, 430 completed at least one choice set, and 422/449 (94 %) completed all 16 choice sets. Interviews revealed that respondents found ten domains difficult but manageable, many adopting simplifying heuristics. Results for clarity and difficulty were identical between formats, but the "highlight" format was preferred by 68 % of respondents. Conditional logit parameter estimates were monotonic within domains, suggesting respondents were able to complete the DCE sensibly, yielding valid results. CONCLUSION: A DCE valuation task in which only four of the QLU-C10D's ten dimensions differed in any choice set is feasible for deriving utility weights for the QLU-C10D.

Health-related quality of life in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving pazopanib or placebo in a randomised phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: In a double-blind, randomised phase III trial of advanced renal cell carcinoma patients, pazopanib 800mg QD (n=290) versus placebo (n=145) significantly prolonged progression-free survival (hazard ratio (HR)=0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.62, p-value<0.0001), without important differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This post-hoc analysis evaluated time to HRQoL deterioration and whether tumour response/stabilisation was associated with HRQoL improvement. METHODS: HRQoL was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D. Effect of pazopanib on time to ⩾20% decline from baseline in summary scores was estimated for all patients and by prior treatment. Analyses were conducted for different HRQoL deterioration thresholds. HRQoL changes were stratified by benefit and compared: complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) versus progressive disease (PD); CR/PR versus stable disease (SD), and SD versus PD. RESULTS: There was a trend for pazopanib patients to be less likely than placebo patients to experience ⩾20% HRQoL deterioration in EORTC-QLQ-C-30 global health status/QOL scale (HR=0.77; 95% CI 0.57-1.03, not significant). Results by prior treatment and different HRQoL deterioration thresholds were similar. Patients with CR/PR and SD experienced significantly less HRQoL deterioration than those with PD (p<0.001, p=0.0024, respectively); mean differences between patients with CR/PR and PD exceeded the pre-determined minimally important difference (MID). Differences between patients with SD and PD did not exceed pre-determined MID. Results were generally consistent across treatment and EQ-5D summary scores. CONCLUSION: Results support the favourable benefit-risk profile of pazopanib and suggest patients experiencing tumour response/stabilisation also may have better HRQoL compared to those without this response.

Outcome, toxicity profile and cost analysis of autologous stem cell mobilization.

Autologous stem cell mobilization (ASCM) is conventionally done using high-dose CY plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G). It is important to examine the outcomes, toxicity profile and costs of ASCM associated with CY+G. A retrospective study was conducted in 236 patients with myeloma or lymphoma undergoing ASCM with CY+G. An ideal outcome was defined as 2 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg collected on the planned day of collection in 1 or 2 apheresis without a negative clinical event. The total cost of ASCM including clinical events, were reported based on Medicare part-B physician, laboratory and ancillary fee schedule. ASCM was successful in 213 (90%) patients, but an ideal outcome was seen in only 50 (20%) patients. Median (interquartile range, IQR) total cost of CY+G stem cells mobilization was $10,605 ($9,230-$14,540). Ideal outcomes were associated with lower costs compared with non-ideal outcomes (median (IQR), $9914 ($8,743-$11,168) versus $11232 ($9,292-$15,518) respectively, P<0.001). The median (IQR) cost of non-ideal outcome was higher among lymphoma patients ($12,293 ($9578-$16,268)) compared with myeloma patients ($10,388 ($9,355-$14,360) (P=0.04). Although mobilization success is eventually realized with CY+G, it has a low rate of ideal outcome, associated with significant adverse events and costs.