Premium
Health‐related quality of life in patients with melanoma expressed as utilities and disability weights
Author(s) -
Tromme I.,
Devleesschauwer B.,
Beutels P.,
Richez P.,
Leroy A.,
Baurain J.F.,
Cornelis F.,
Bertrand C.,
Legrand N.,
Degueldre J.,
Thomas L.,
Legrand C.,
Lambert J.,
Haagsma J.,
Speybroeck N.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
british journal of dermatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.304
H-Index - 179
eISSN - 1365-2133
pISSN - 0007-0963
DOI - 10.1111/bjd.13262
Subject(s) - quality of life (healthcare) , medicine , eq 5d , melanoma , physical therapy , population , norm (philosophy) , quality adjusted life year , visual analogue scale , cancer , health related quality of life , gerontology , demography , cost effectiveness , environmental health , disease , cancer research , sociology , political science , law , risk analysis (engineering) , nursing
Summary Background Few studies about health‐related quality of life ( HRQ oL) in patients with melanoma have expressed their results in terms of utilities or disability weights ( DW s). Utilities are required for calculating quality‐adjusted life years and therefore for cost‐effectiveness analyses. DW s are useful to assess the burden of diseases through disability‐adjusted life years. Objectives To provide utilities and DW s regarding patients with melanoma. Methods The patients were classified into eight groups using four stages based on the 2009 American Joint Committee on Cancer stages, with each stage subdivided into treatment and remission phases. The EuroQoL Five Dimensions Five Levels ( EQ ‐5D‐5L) questionnaire was completed by the patients with melanoma to provide a mean utility for each group. In addition to this, the EuroQoL visual analogue scale ( VAS ) and a validated quality‐of‐life questionnaire dedicated to patients with melanoma [Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Melanoma ( FACT ‐M)] were completed by the same patients in order to compare their results with the obtained utilities. DW s were obtained by calculating, for each patient, the difference between his/her utility and the corresponding sex‐ and age‐specific population norm. Results A total of 395 questionnaire sets were completed. Utilities and DW s showed significant differences between follow‐up groups. Treatment groups had similar utilities and DW s but these results were obtained during different treatment durations and therefore have different weights. The VAS and the FACT ‐M were found to be less sensitive. Nevertheless, the FACT ‐M identified some problems not found by the EQ ‐5D‐5L questionnaire. Conclusions The EQ ‐5D‐5L questionnaire seems adequate to provide utilities and DW s in patients with melanoma. Lower HRQ oL in female patients with melanoma is probably linked to lower HRQ oL in the general population.