Utilities in a rare disease collected via vignettes in general population samples from the UK and France: comparison of results

Author(s)

Buesch K1, Smith A2, Hanbury A3, Beitia Ortiz de Zarate I4, Hammes F5, de Pouvourville G6
1PTC Therapeutics Switzerland GmbH, Zug, Switzerland, 2RB, Hull, ERY, UK, 3York Health Economics Consortium, York, UK, 4PTC Therapeutics France, Paris, 75, France, 5PTC Therapeutics France, Paris, France, 6ESSEC Business School, Cergy-Pontoise, France

OBJECTIVES: Health state utilities are required to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an intervention. Vignettes had been developed for aromatic amino acid decarboxylase (AADC) deficiency with input from caregivers, clinicians and other experts, which were then completed online by panel participants from the United Kingdom and France. The objective was to compare the results generated in those two countries.

METHODS: Representative samples of the general population in both countries were presented with a total of 5 health state vignettes: bedridden, head control, sitting unsupported, standing with assistance and walking with assistance. Health state utilities were elicited using time-trade off (TTO; 10-year time horizon) and the standard gamble (SG).

RESULTS: A total of 1598 participants completed the vignettes in the UK, 1001 in France, with only 37% incongruent responses in the UK and 27% in France. The mean health utilities (standard deviation) increased linearly as health states improve. TTO results for congruent UK responses were: bedridden 0.42 (+0.32); head control 0.48 (+0.32), sitting unsupported 0.58 (+0.31); standing with assistance 0.63 (+0.32); and walking with assistance 0.67 (+0.33). For France respective utilities were: bedridden 0.39 (+0.36); head control 0.48 (+0.36), sitting unsupported 0.53 (+0.37); standing with assistance 0.53 (+0.38); and walking with assistance 0.56 (+0.38). French respondents had the highest differences in terms of preference between the "bedridden" and "head control" health states (0.09); the UK respondents between “head control” and “sitting unaided” (0.1). Except for head control, the UK had higher utility values in each of the health states and the overall utility gain between the lowest and highest health state were higher in the UK compared to France (difference of 0.25 vs 0.17). Same patterns were observed for SG.

CONCLUSIONS: These country-specific health state utilities will be used for a cost-effectiveness model comparing a treatment for AADC deficiency to standard of care.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2021-05, ISPOR 2021, Montreal, Canada

Value in Health, Volume 24, Issue 5, S1 (May 2021)

Code

PRO48

Topic

Patient-Centered Research

Topic Subcategory

Health State Utilities

Disease

Rare and Orphan Diseases

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×