This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

A preliminary cost utility analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy for resected colonic carcinoma, CHERE Discussion Paper No 15

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
RD Smith
Jane Hall () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)
P Harnett
H Gurney

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In 1990, a study was published (Moertel CG, et al 1990) which recommended a new treatment standard for colon cancer: a 52 week course of adjuvant chemotherapy. The study recommended that such a course of chemotherapy administered after surgical resection could increase five year survival from 55% to 71%. However, this recommendation raised several concerns, particularly about the quality of life of patients undergoing such a long course of chemotherapy and the costs to the health care system of such a prolonged therapy. This paper sought to address both of these issues in the context of an economic evaluation. The cost of surgery plus chemotherapy was estimated and compared with the cost of surgery alone. Descriptions of quality of life were developed from interviews with patients and health professionals, and the time trade off technique was then used to derive utility weights (from a small sample of 16) which were used to adjust length of life to reflect quality, in terms of a "quality adjusted life year" (QALY). Expected survival with and without chemotherapy was based on published data. Chemotherapy increased the total cost of treating a patient with colon cancer by $7,010 per year, from $6,012 to $13,022. The extra benefit gained from the chemotherapy was 2.4 life years. The cost per extra life year gained was therefore $2,920. Incorporating quality of life reduced this gain to 0.36 QALYs. Thus the cost per QALY gained was $19,472. The results of this analysis are only tentative, as the quality of life descriptions were not measured over time, but from a cross sectional survey of patients, and the valuations of health states were derived from a small sample. However, the results do demonstrate the importance of quality of life in the evaluation of cancer treatment.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.chere.uts.edu.au/pdf/dp15.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: First version, 1993
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney in its series Discussion Papers with number 15.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Feb 1993
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:her:chedps:15

Contact details of provider:
Postal: PO Box 123 Broadway NSW 2007, Level 2, Block D, Building 5, 1-59 Quay Street Haymarket NSW 2000
Phone: 61 2 9514 4720
Fax: 61 2 9514 4730
Email:
Web page: http://www.chere.uts.edu.au
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Liz Chinchen).

Related research
Keywords: cost utility analysis; chemotherapy; colon cancer;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The RePEc project started in 1997. Its precursor, NetEc, dates back to 1993.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-13.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.