COMPARISON OF GENERIC AND CONDITION-SPECIFIC PREFERENCE MEASURES TO DERIVE HEALTH UTILITIES- A RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF NIVOLUMAB TRIALS IN SOLID TUMOURS
Author(s)
Shaw JW1, Bennett B2, DeRosa M3, Taylor F3, Kiff C2, Ntais D2, Noon K2, King MT4, Cocks K5
1Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lawrenceville, NJ, USA, 2Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Uxbridge, UK, 3Adelphi Values, Boston, MA, USA, 4University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 5Adelphi Values Ltd, Bollington, UK
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: There is growing interest in using condition-specific preference measures, including the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 Dimensions (EORTC QLU-C10D), to inform economic evaluations of cancer treatments. This research assessed the implications of using utility indices based on the 3-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L), a mapping of the EQ-5D-3L to the 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L), and the QLU-C10D and compared the psychometric properties of the indices. METHODS: Utilities for progression-related states were estimated for 8 phase 3 trials of nivolumab±ipilimumab using the EQ-5D-3L UK and US value sets, mapped EQ-5D-5L English value set, and QLU-C10D UK and Australian value sets. These were entered into UK cost-effectiveness models to derive quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for treatments. Psychometric properties of the indices were assessed using pooled trial data. RESULTS: The mapped EQ-5D-5L English index yielded greater incremental QALYs for nivolumab±ipilimumab vs comparators than the EQ-5D-3L UK and QLU-C10D UK indices. Absolute differences in incremental QALYs ranged from 0.01-0.16 (mapped EQ-5D-5L English vs EQ-5D-3L UK), 0.04-0.31 (mapped EQ-5D-5L English vs QLU-C10D UK), and 0.02-0.15 (EQ-5D-3L UK vs QLU-C10D UK). All indices differentiated groups defined by baseline performance status (PS), EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and cancer stage. Similarly, all indices detected meaningful change in tumour response, VAS score, and PS. Effect sizes were generally similar in interpretation, though the QLU-C10D UK index was more sensitive to worsened EQ-5D VAS score and PS, while the mapped EQ-5D-5L English index was less sensitive to improved tumour response. CONCLUSIONS: On average, the mapped EQ-5D-5L English index and QLU-C10D UK index yielded 6% more and 2% fewer incremental QALYs, respectively, than the EQ-5D-3L UK index. The lower QALY yields of the QLU-C10D were balanced by slightly greater validity and responsiveness. The implications of these findings for use of the EQ-5D-5L and QLU-C10D are discussed.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2019-11, ISPOR Europe 2019, Copenhagen, Denmark
Acceptance Code
SP1
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Methodological & Statistical Research, Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Health State Utilities, Modeling and simulation, PRO & Related Methods, Trial-Based Economic Evaluation
Disease
Oncology