BMC Cancer (Nov 2018)

Disease severity-based evaluation of utility weights for lung cancer-related health states in Korea

  • Eun-Jung Kim,
  • Minsu Ock,
  • Kyu-pyo Kim,
  • Nuri Hyun Jung,
  • Hyeon-Jeong Lee,
  • Seon-Ha Kim,
  • Min-Woo Jo

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4960-y
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 18, no. 1
pp. 1 – 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Utility weight, a measure of health-related quality of life, is used in disease burden measurements and economic evaluations. In this study, we used the visual analogue scale (VAS) and standard gamble (SG) method to determine the utility weights of lung cancer health states in South Korea from a societal perspective. Methods Six hypothetical health states for lung cancer or a related health state reflective of disease severity were developed: 1) Stage I, 2) Stage II, 3) Stage IIIa, 4) Stage IIIB, 5) Stage IV, and 6) Pulmonary nodule. The description of each health state description was divided into four parts: diagnosis, symptoms, treatment, and progression and prognosis. A total of 515 representative adult Korean participants used a VAS and SG to evaluate these six health states via face-to-face computer-assisted interviews. The means, standard deviations, and median utility weights of the six health states were estimated by valuation method. Results The two valuation methods of the scenarios yielded the same mean utility rankings. Pulmonary nodule received the highest rank (VAS, 0.66 and SG, 0.83), whereas Stage 4 was assigned the lowest rank (VAS, 0.09 and SG, 0.31). For all health states, the mean utility weights calculated using the SG were greater than those calculated using the VAS. The differences between the utility weights obtained using the two valuation methods ranged from 0.14 (Stage I) to 0.22 (Stage IV). The two approaches tended to yield larger differences for more severe stages. Conclusions This study determined utilities for squamous cell lung cancer that will be useful for estimating the burden of lung cancer and for conducting economic evaluations of lung cancer interventions.

Keywords