IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v8y2024i1d10.1007_s41669-023-00448-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

United States Value Set for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Eight Dimensions (FACT-8D), a Cancer-Specific Preference-Based Quality of Life Instrument

Author

Listed:
  • Madeleine T. King

    (University of Sydney)

  • D. A. Revicki

    (Revicki Outcomes Research Consulting)

  • R. Norman

    (Curtin University)

  • F. Müller

    (Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam)

  • R.C. Viney

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • A. S. Pickard

    (University of Illinois at Chicago)

  • D. Cella

    (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine)

  • J. W. Shaw

    (Global Health Economics and Outcomes Research)

Abstract

Objectives To develop a value set reflecting the United States (US) general population’s preferences for health states described by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) eight-dimensions preference-based multi-attribute utility instrument (FACT-8D), derived from the FACT-General cancer-specific health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) questionnaire. Methods A US online panel was quota-sampled to achieve a general population sample representative by sex, age (≥ 18 years), race and ethnicity. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to value health states. The valuation task involved choosing between pairs of health states (choice-sets) described by varying levels of the FACT-8D HRQL dimensions and survival (life-years). The DCE included 100 choice-sets; each respondent was randomly allocated 16 choice-sets. Data were analysed using conditional logit regression parameterized to fit the quality-adjusted life-year framework, weighted for sociodemographic variables that were non-representative of the US general population. Preference weights were calculated as the ratio of HRQL-level coefficients to the survival coefficient. Results 2562 panel members opted in, 2462 (96%) completed at least one choice-set and 2357 (92%) completed 16 choice-sets. Pain and nausea were associated with the largest utility weights, work and sleep had more moderate utility weights, and sadness, worry and support had the smallest utility weights. Within dimensions, more severe HRQL levels were generally associated with larger weights. A preference-weighting algorithm to estimate US utilities from responses to the FACT-General questionnaire was generated. The worst health state’s value was −0.33. Conclusions This value set provides US population utilities for health states defined by the FACT-8D for use in evaluating oncology treatments.

Suggested Citation

  • Madeleine T. King & D. A. Revicki & R. Norman & F. Müller & R.C. Viney & A. S. Pickard & D. Cella & J. W. Shaw, 2024. "United States Value Set for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Eight Dimensions (FACT-8D), a Cancer-Specific Preference-Based Quality of Life Instrument," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 49-63, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:8:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s41669-023-00448-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-023-00448-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-023-00448-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-023-00448-5?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:pharmo:v:8:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s41669-023-00448-5. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.