Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

The EORTC QLU-C10D is a valid cancer-specific preference-based measure for cost-utility and health technology assessment in the Netherlands

  • Micha J. Pilz
  • , Simon Seyringer
  • , Lára R. Hallsson
  • , Andrew Bottomley
  • , Femke Jansen
  • , Madeleine T. King
  • , Richard Norman
  • , Marianne J. Rutten
  • , Irma M. Verdonck-de Leeuw
  • , Peter D. Siersema
  • , Eva Maria Gamper*
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Innsbruck Medical University
  • Private University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology
  • European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Data Center
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
  • Amsterdam UMC
  • University of Sydney
  • Curtin University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)
53 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Cost-utility analysis typically relies on preference-based measures (PBMs). While generic PBMs are widely used, disease-specific PBMs can capture aspects relevant for certain patient populations. Here the EORTC QLU-C10D, a cancer-specific PBM based on the QLQ-C30, is validated using Dutch trial data with the EQ-5D-3L as a generic comparator measure. Methods: We retrospectively analysed data from four Dutch randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comprising the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-5D-3L. Respective Dutch value sets were applied. Correlations between the instruments were calculated for domains and index scores. Bland–Altman plots and intra-class correlations (ICC) displayed agreement between the measures. Independent and paired t-tests, effect sizes and relative validity indices were used to determine the instruments’ performance in detecting clinically known-group differences and health changes over time. Results: We analysed data from 602 cancer patients from four different trials. In overall, the EORTC QLU-C10D showed good relative validity with the EQ-5D-3L as a comparator (correlations of index scores r = 0.53–0.75, ICCs 0.686–0.808, conceptually similar domains showed higher correlations than dissimilar domains). Most importantly, it detected 63% of expected clinical group differences and 50% of changes over time in patients undergoing treatment. Both instruments showed poor performance in survivors. Detection rate and measurement efficiency were clearly higher for the QLU-C10D than for the EQ-5D-3L. Conclusions: The Dutch EORTC QLU-C10D showed good comparative validity in patients undergoing treatment. Our results underline the benefit that can be achieved by using a cancer-specific PBM for generating health utilities for cancer patients from a measurement perspective.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1539-1555
Number of pages17
JournalEuropean Journal of Health Economics
Volume25
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2024

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The EORTC QLU-C10D is a valid cancer-specific preference-based measure for cost-utility and health technology assessment in the Netherlands'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this