IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v35y2015i3p351-360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods to Estimate EQ-5D Utility Scores from EORTC QLQ Data in Myeloma for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Samer A. Kharroubi
  • Richard Edlin
  • David Meads
  • Chantelle Browne
  • Julia Brown
  • Christopher McCabe

Abstract

Background. Patient-reported outcome measures are an important component of the evidence for health technology appraisal. Their incorporation into cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) requires conversion of descriptive information into utilities. This can be done by using bespoke utility algorithms. Otherwise, investigators will often estimate indirect utility models for the patient-reported outcome measures using off-the-shelf utility data such as the EQ-5D or SF-6D. Numerous modeling strategies are reported; however, to date, there has been limited utilization of Bayesian methods in this context. In this article, we examine the relative advantage of the Bayesian methods in relation to dealing with missing data, relaxing the assumption of equal variances and characterizing the uncertainty in the model predictions. Methods. Data from a large myeloma trial were used to examine the relationship between scores in each of the 19 domains of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30/QLQ-MY20 and the EQ-5D utility. Data from 1839 patients were divided 75%/25% between derivation and validation sets. A conventional ordinary least squares model assuming equal variance and a Bayesian model allowing unequal variance were estimated on complete cases. Two further models were estimated using conventional and Bayesian multiple imputation, respectively, using the full data set. Models were compared in terms of data fit, accuracy in model prediction, and characterization of uncertainty in model predictions. Conclusions. Mean EQ-5D utility weights can be estimated from the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-MY20 for use in CEAs. Frequentist and Bayesian methods produced effectively identical models. However, the Bayesian models provide distributions describing the uncertainty surrounding the estimated utility values and are thus more suited informing analyses for probabilistic CEAs.

Suggested Citation

  • Samer A. Kharroubi & Richard Edlin & David Meads & Chantelle Browne & Julia Brown & Christopher McCabe, 2015. "Use of Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods to Estimate EQ-5D Utility Scores from EORTC QLQ Data in Myeloma for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(3), pages 351-360, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:35:y:2015:i:3:p:351-360
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15575285
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X15575285
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X15575285?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tsuchiya, A & Brazier, J & McColl, E & Parkin, D, 2002. "Deriving preference-based single indices from non-preference based condition-specific instruments: converting AQLQ into EQ5D indices," MPRA Paper 29740, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Ralph Crott & Andrew Briggs, 2010. "Mapping the QLQ-C30 quality of life cancer questionnaire to EQ-5D patient preferences," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(4), pages 427-434, August.
    3. Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher & Chris McCabe & Andrew Briggs & Ron Akehurst & Martin Buxton & John Brazier & Tony O'Hagan, 2005. "Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(4), pages 339-347, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anthony J. Hatswell & Darren Burns & Gianluca Baio & Frances Wadelin, 2019. "Frequentist and Bayesian meta‐regression of health state utilities for multiple myeloma incorporating systematic review and analysis of individual patient data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 653-665, May.
    2. Alexina J. Mason & Manuel Gomes & James Carpenter & Richard Grieve, 2021. "Flexible Bayesian longitudinal models for cost‐effectiveness analyses with informative missing data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(12), pages 3138-3158, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. A. E. Ades & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2006. "Evidence synthesis, parameter correlation and probabilistic sensitivity analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 373-381, April.
    2. Dongzhe Hong & Lei Si & Minghuan Jiang & Hui Shao & Wai-kit Ming & Yingnan Zhao & Yan Li & Lizheng Shi, 2019. "Cost Effectiveness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) Inhibitors, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists, and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) Inhibitors: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 777-818, June.
    3. Pedram Sendi & Huldrych F Günthard & Mathew Simcock & Bruno Ledergerber & Jörg Schüpbach & Manuel Battegay & for the Swiss HIV Cohort Study, 2007. "Cost-Effectiveness of Genotypic Antiretroviral Resistance Testing in HIV-Infected Patients with Treatment Failure," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(1), pages 1-8, January.
    4. Isaac Corro Ramos & Maureen P. M. H. Rutten-van Mölken & Maiwenn J. Al, 2013. "The Role of Value-of-Information Analysis in a Health Care Research Priority Setting," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(4), pages 472-489, May.
    5. Brazier, JE & Yang, Y & Tsuchiya, A, 2008. "A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) from non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures," MPRA Paper 29808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Billingsley Kaambwa & Julie Ratcliffe, 2018. "Predicting EuroQoL 5 Dimensions 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utilities from Older People’s Quality of Life Brief Questionnaire (OPQoL-Brief) Scores," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(1), pages 39-54, February.
    7. McKenna, Claire & Chalabi, Zaid & Epstein, David & Claxton, Karl, 2010. "Budgetary policies and available actions: A generalisation of decision rules for allocation and research decisions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 170-181, January.
    8. Mattias Ekman & Peter Lindgren & Carolin Miltenburger & Genevieve Meier & Julie Locklear & Mary Chatterton, 2012. "Cost Effectiveness of Quetiapine in Patients with Acute Bipolar Depression and in Maintenance Treatment after an Acute Depressive Episode," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(6), pages 513-530, June.
    9. Billingsley Kaambwa & Gang Chen & Julie Ratcliffe & Angelo Iezzi & Aimee Maxwell & Jeff Richardson, 2017. "Mapping Between the Sydney Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ-S) and Five Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments (MAUIs)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 111-124, January.
    10. Peter J. Dodd & Debebe Shaweno & Chu-Chang Ku & Philippe Glaziou & Carel Pretorius & Richard J. Hayes & Peter MacPherson & Ted Cohen & Helen Ayles, 2023. "Transmission modeling to infer tuberculosis incidence prevalence and mortality in settings with generalized HIV epidemics," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Emma McIntosh, 2006. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments within a Cost-Benefit Analysis Framework," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 24(9), pages 855-868, September.
    12. Mona Aghdaee & Bonny Parkinson & Kompal Sinha & Yuanyuan Gu & Rajan Sharma & Emma Olin & Henry Cutler, 2022. "An examination of machine learning to map non‐preference based patient reported outcome measures to health state utility values," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(8), pages 1525-1557, August.
    13. John Hutton, 2012. "‘Health Economics’ and the evolution of economic evaluation of health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 13-18, January.
    14. Anna Heath & Petros Pechlivanoglou, 2022. "Prioritizing Research in an Era of Personalized Medicine: The Potential Value of Unexplained Heterogeneity," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 42(5), pages 649-660, July.
    15. Sofia Dias & Alex J. Sutton & Nicky J. Welton & A. E. Ades, 2013. "Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 6," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(5), pages 671-678, July.
    16. Wijnen, Ben F.M. & Mosweu, Iris & Majoie, Marian H.J.M. & Ridsdale, Leone & de Kinderen, Reina J.A. & Evers, Silvia M.A.A. & McCrone, Paul, 2018. "A comparison of the responsiveness of EQ-5D-5L and the QOLIE-31P and mapping of QOLIE-31P to EQ-5D-5L in epilepsy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 106170, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Kamran Khan & Stavros Petrou & Oliver Rivero-Arias & Stephen Walters & Spencer Boyle, 2014. "Mapping EQ-5D Utility Scores from the PedsQL™ Generic Core Scales," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(7), pages 693-706, July.
    18. Rowen, D & Brazier, J & Tsuchiya, A & Hernández, M & Ibbotson, R, 2009. "The simultaneous valuation of states from multiple instruments using ranking and VAS data: methods and preliminary results," MPRA Paper 29841, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Alan Brennan & Stephen E. Chick & Ruth Davies, 2006. "A taxonomy of model structures for economic evaluation of health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(12), pages 1295-1310, December.
    20. Richard Huan Xu & Eliza Lai Yi Wong & Jun Jin & Ying Dou & Dong Dong, 2020. "Mapping of the EORTC QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D-5L index in patients with lymphomas," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(9), pages 1363-1373, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:35:y:2015:i:3:p:351-360. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.