دورية أكاديمية
Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review.
| العنوان: | Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Yong ASJ; School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, Bandar Sunway, 47500, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia., Lim YH; School of Biosciences, Taylor's University, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia., Cheong MWL; School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, Bandar Sunway, 47500, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia., Hamzah E; Hospis Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia., Teoh SL; School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, Bandar Sunway, 47500, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. teoh.siew.li@monash.edu. |
| المصدر: | The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care [Eur J Health Econ] 2022 Aug; Vol. 23 (6), pp. 1037-1057. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Dec 02. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article; Systematic Review |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Springer-Verlag Country of Publication: Germany NLM ID: 101134867 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1618-7601 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 16187598 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Eur J Health Econ Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: Berlin : Springer-Verlag, c2001- |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Neoplasms*/drug therapy , Quality of Life*, Humans ; Pain ; Patient Preference ; Quality-Adjusted Life Years ; Surveys and Questionnaires |
| مستخلص: | Background: Understanding patient preferences in cancer management is essential for shared decision-making. Patient or societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) for desired outcomes in cancer management represents their preferences and values of these outcomes. Objective: The aim of this systematic review is to critically evaluate how current literature has addressed WTP in relation to cancer treatment and achievement of outcomes. Methods: Seven databases were searched from inception until 2 March 2021 to include studies with primary data of WTP values for cancer treatments or achievement of outcomes that were elicited using stated preference methods. Results: Fifty-four studies were included in this review. All studies were published after year 2000 and more than 90% of the studies were conducted in high-income countries. Sample size of the studies ranged from 35 to 2040, with patient being the most studied population. There was a near even distribution between studies using contingent valuation and discrete choice experiment. Based on the included studies, the highest WTP values were for a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ($11,498-$589,822), followed by 1-year survival ($3-$198,576), quality of life (QoL) improvement ($5531-$139,499), and pain reduction ($79-$94,662). Current empirical evidence suggested that improvement in QoL and pain reduction had comparable weights to survival in cancer management. Conclusion: This systematic review provides a summary on stated preference studies that elicited patient preferences via WTP and summarised their respective values. Respondents in this review had comparable WTP for 1-year survival and QoL, suggesting that improvement in QoL should be emphasised together with survival in cancer management. (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.) |
| References: | Wang, H., Naghavi, M., Allen, C., Barber, R.M., Bhutta, Z.A., Carter, A., et al.: Global, regional, and national life expectancy, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. The Lancet. 388(10053), 1459–1544 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31012-1. (PMID: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31012-1) Knaul, F.M., Farmer, P.E., Krakauer, E.L., De Lima, L., Bhadelia, A., Jiang Kwete, X., et al.: Alleviating the access abyss in palliative care and pain relief—an imperative of universal health coverage: the Lancet Commission report. The Lancet. 391(10128), 1391–1454 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32513-8. (PMID: 10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32513-8) Yabroff, K.R., Lund, J., Kepka, D., Mariotto, A.: Economic burden of cancer in the United States: estimates, projections, and future research. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 20(10), 2006–2014 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0650. (PMID: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0650) Luengo-Fernandez, R., Leal, J., Gray, A., Sullivan, R.: Economic burden of cancer across the European Union: a population-based cost analysis. Lancet Oncol. 14(12), 1165–1174 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70442-X. (PMID: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70442-X24131614) Rocque, G.B., Rasool, A., Williams, B.R., Wallace, A.S., Niranjan, S.J., Halilova, K.I., et al.: What is important when making treatment decisions in metastatic breast cancer? A qualitative analysis of decision-making in patients and oncologists. Oncologist. 24(10), 1313–1321 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0711. (PMID: 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0711308724666795158) Kehl, K.L., Landrum, M.B., Arora, N.K., Ganz, P.A., van Ryn, M., Mack, J.W., et al.: Association of actual and preferred decision roles with patient-reported quality of care: shared decision making in cancer care. JAMA Oncol. 1(1), 50–58 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2014.112. (PMID: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2014.112261823034937185) Joosten, E.A.G., DeFuentes-Merillas, L., de Weert, G.H., Sensky, T., van der Staak, C.P.F., de Jong, C.A.J.: Systematic review of the effects of shared decision-making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status. Psychother. Psychosom. 77(4), 219–226 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1159/000126073. (PMID: 10.1159/00012607318418028) Doyle, C., Lennox, L., Bell, D.: A systematic review of evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness. BMJ Open 3(1), e001570 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001570. (PMID: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001570232932443549241) Whitehead, S.J., Ali, S.: Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br. Med. Bull. 96, 5–21 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldq033. (PMID: 10.1093/bmb/ldq03321037243) Bala, M., Mauskopf, J., Wood, L.: Willingness to pay as a measure of health benefits. Pharmacoeconomics 15(1), 9–18 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915010-00002. (PMID: 10.2165/00019053-199915010-0000210345161) Olsen, J.A., Smith, R.D.: Theory versus practice: a review of ‘willingness-to-pay’in health and health care. Health Econ. 10(1), 39–52 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1050(200101)10:1%3c39::aid-hec563%3e3.0.co;2-e. (PMID: 10.1002/1099-1050(200101)10:1<39::aid-hec563>3.0.co;2-e11180568) Ryan, M., Farrar, S.: Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 320(7248), 1530–1533 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7248.1530. (PMID: 10.1136/bmj.320.7248.1530108349051118112) O’Brien, B., Gafni, A.: When do the" dollars" make sense? Toward a conceptual framework for contingent valuation studies in health care. Med. Decis. Mak. 16(3), 288–299 (1996). (PMID: 10.1177/0272989X9601600314) Klose, T.: The contingent valuation method in health care. Health Policy 47(2), 97–123 (1999). (PMID: 10.1016/S0168-8510(99)00010-X) Bridges, J.F.: Stated preference methods in health care evaluation: an emerging methodological paradigm in health economics. Appl. Health. Econ. Health Policy. 2(4), 213–224 (2003). (PMID: 15119540) de Bekker-Grob, E.W., Donkers, B., Bliemer, M.C.J., Veldwijk, J., Swait, J.D.: Can healthcare choice be predicted using stated preference data? Soc. Sci. Med. 246, 112736 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112736. (PMID: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.11273631887626) Morrell, L., Wordsworth, S., Rees, S., Barker, R.: Does the public prefer health gain for cancer patients? A systematic review of public views on cancer and its characteristics. Pharmacoeconomics 35(8), 793–804 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-017-0511-7. (PMID: 10.1007/s40273-017-0511-7284558345548817) Whitty, J.A., Lancsar, E., Rixon, K., Golenko, X., Ratcliffe, J.: A systematic review of stated preference studies reporting public preferences for healthcare priority setting. Patient. 7(4), 365–386 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-014-0063-2. (PMID: 10.1007/s40271-014-0063-224872225) MacLeod, T., Harris, A., Mahal, A.: Stated and revealed preferences for funding new high-cost cancer drugs: a critical review of the evidence from patients, the public and payers. Patient. 9(3), 201–222 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-015-0139-7. (PMID: 10.1007/s40271-015-0139-726370257) Lin, P.J., Cangelosi, M.J., Lee, D.W., Neumann, P.J.: Willingness to pay for diagnostic technologies: a review of the contingent valuation literature. Value Health. 16(5), 797–805 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2013.04.005. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.04.00523947973) Mansfield, C., Tangka, F.K., Ekwueme, D.U., Smith, J.L., Guy, G.P., Li, C., et al.: Stated preference for cancer screening: a systematic review of the literature, 1990–2013. Prev. Chronic Dis. 13, E27 (2016). https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd13.150433. (PMID: 10.5888/pcd13.150433269168984768876) Blanchard, P., Volk, R.J., Ringash, J., Peterson, S.K., Hutcheson, K.A., Frank, S.J.: Assessing head and neck cancer patient preferences and expectations: A Systematic review. Oral Oncol. 62, 44–53 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2016.09.008. (PMID: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2016.09.00827865371) Guerra, R.L., Castaneda, L., de Albuquerque, R.C.R., Ferreira, C.B.T., Correa, F.M., Fernandes, R.R.A., et al.: Patient preferences for breast cancer treatment interventions: a systematic review of discrete choice experiments. Patient. 12(6), 559–569 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-019-00375-w. (PMID: 10.1007/s40271-019-00375-w31321706) Sugitani, Y., Sugitani, N., Ono, S.: Quantitative preferences for lung cancer treatment from the patients’ perspective: a systematic review. The Patient Patient-Cent. Outcomes Res. 13(5), 521–536 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-020-00434-7. (PMID: 10.1007/s40271-020-00434-7) Schmidt, K., Damm, K., Prenzler, A., Golpon, H., Welte, T.: Preferences of lung cancer patients for treatment and decision-making: a systematic literature review. Eur. J. Cancer Care (Engl). 25(4), 580–591 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12425. (PMID: 10.1111/ecc.12425) Damm, K., Vogel, A., Prenzler, A.: Preferences of colorectal cancer patients for treatment and decision-making: a systematic literature review. Eur J. Cancer Care. 23(6), 762–772 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12207. (PMID: 10.1111/ecc.12207) Bath-Hextall, F., Nalubega, S., Evans, C.: The needs and experiences of patients with skin cancer: a qualitative systematic review with metasynthesis. Br J Dermatol. 177(3), 666–687 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.15148. (PMID: 10.1111/bjd.1514827775838) Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6(7), e100097 (2009). The World Bank. World Development Indicators. https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=2&series=NY.GDP.DEFL.ZS . Accessed 2 Sep 2020. Smith, R.D., Sach, T.H.: Contingent valuation: what needs to be done? Health Econ Policy Law. 5(Pt 1), 91–111 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133109990016. (PMID: 10.1017/S174413310999001619706221) Bridges, J.F., Hauber, A.B., Marshall, D., Lloyd, A., Prosser, L.A., Regier, D.A., et al.: Conjoint analysis applications in health-a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 14(4), 403–413 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.01321669364) Benidir, T., Finelli, A., Hamilton, R., Hersey, K., Joshua, A., Kulkarni, G., et al.: Patient understanding regarding end-of-life prostate cancer and perspectives regarding cost/ benefit of current treatment paradigms. J. Urol. 193(4), e929 (2015). Goldberg, R.J., Jang, R.W., Leighl, N.B.: A willingness-to-pay study of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 1, 6581 (2009). (PMID: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.6581) Jo, C.: Using discrete choice experiments to estimate the willingness to pay for cancer treatment in Korea: a general population study. Value Health. 13(3), A46 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-3015%2810%2972208-7. (PMID: 10.1016/S1098-3015%2810%2972208-7) Jo, C.: Using discrete choice experiments to estimate the marginal willingness to pay of insurance premium for lung cancer treatment in Korea. Value Health. 13(7), A515 (2010). Jo, C., Cho, D.H.: Using discrete choice experiments to estimate the marginal willingness to pay of insurance premium for stomach cancer treatment in Korea. Value Health. 13(3), A46 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-3015%2810%2972207-5. (PMID: 10.1016/S1098-3015%2810%2972207-5) Konstantopoulou, T., Pacheco, R.: Patients’ preferences for breast cancer treatments: results of a discrete choice experiment (Dce) Survey from Spain, France Poland and Ireland. Value Health. 22(Supplement 3), S922–S923 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.09.2737. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.09.2737) Lalla, D., McLaughlin, T., Brammer, M., Bramley, T., Bare, A., Carlton, R.: Willingness to pay for a reduction in risk of treatment side effects in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Value Health. 14(7), A462 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.1251. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.1251) Liao, C., Yang, M., Hung, Y., Chen, S., Tang, C.: A discrete choice experiment for engaging patients in reimbursement decision making: Patient preferences on adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Value Health. 18(7), A470 (2015). (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.09.1243) Obradovic, M., Mrhar, A., Kos, M.: Willingness to pay for a life-year gained from the perspective of the general population. Value Health. 12(7), A284 (2009). (PMID: 10.1016/S1098-3015(10)74393-X) Sousa, N., Costa, T., Monteiro-Soares, M., Goncalves, F. R., Azevedo, L. F.: Bias in valuation of health care benefits in metastatic prostate cancer: A contingent valuation of willingness to pay. J. Clin. Oncol. Conf. 35(15 Supplement 1) (2017). Tang, C.: Women’s preferences for breast reconstruction: a study using a discrete choice experiments. Value Health. 15(7), A406 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.1181. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.1181) Yucel, A., Chase, K., Kumar, R., Fuehrer, D., Bensink, M.: Pcn265 breast cancer patient preference and willingness to pay for granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-Csf). Value Health. 22(Supplement 2), S107 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.04.386. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.04.386) Golda, N., Black, W., Patel, V., Neal, D., Etzkorn, J.: Determining patient preferences and willingness to pay related to scar length and appearance after skin cancer treatment on the face and trunk: a multicenter discrete choice experiment. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 81(4), 1011–1013 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2019.01.080. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.01.08030731171) Olofsson, S., Gerdtham, U.G., Hultkrantz, L., Persson, U.: Measuring the end-of-life premium in cancer using individual ex ante willingness to pay. Eur. J. Health Econ. 19(6), 807–820 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-017-0922-6. (PMID: 10.1007/s10198-017-0922-628803265) Bazarbashi, S., De Vol, E.B., Maraiki, F., Al-Jedai, A., Ali, A.A., Alhammad, A.M., et al.: Empirical monetary valuation of a quality-adjusted life-year in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: a willingness-to-pay analysis. PharmacoEconomics-Open 4(4), 625–633 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-020-00211-0. (PMID: 10.1007/s41669-020-00211-0322917267688848) Thongprasert, S., Crawford, B., Sakulbumrungsil, R., Chaiyakunapruk, N., Petcharapiruch, S., Leartsakulpanitch, J., et al.: Willingness to pay for lung cancer treatment: Patient versus general public values. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 31(4), 264–270 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462315000409. (PMID: 10.1017/S026646231500040926353902) Finkelstein, E.A., Bilger, M., Flynn, T.N., Malhotra, C.: Preferences for end-of-life care among community-dwelling older adults and patients with advanced cancer: A discrete choice experiment. Health Policy 119(11), 1482–1489 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.09.001. (PMID: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.09.00126421597) Fischer, B., Telser, H., Zweifel, P.: End-of-life healthcare expenditure: testing economic explanations using a discrete choice experiment. J. Health Econ. 60, 30–38 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2018.06.001. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2018.06.00129906764) Malhotra, C., Farooqui, M.A., Kanesvaran, R., Bilger, M., Finkelstein, E.: Comparison of preferences for end-of-life care among patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers: a discrete choice experiment. Palliat. Med. 29(9), 842–850 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216315578803. (PMID: 10.1177/026921631557880325805740) Stenehjem, D.D., Au, T.H., Ngorsuraches, S., Ma, J.B.H., Wanishayakorn, T., Nelson, R.S., et al.: Immunotargeted therapy in melanoma: patient, provider preferences, and willingness to pay at an academic cancer center. Melanoma Res. 29(6), 626–634 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1097/CMR.0000000000000572. (PMID: 10.1097/CMR.0000000000000572306887626887632) Ngorsuraches, S., Thongkeaw, K.: Patients’ preferences and willingness-to-pay for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer treatments after failure of standard treatments. Springerplus 4(1), 674 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1482-9. (PMID: 10.1186/s40064-015-1482-9265581774635317) Sun, H., Wang, H., Xu, N., Li, J., Shi, J., Zhou, N., et al.: Patient preferences for chemotherapy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A multicenter discrete choice experiment (DCE) study in China. Patient Prefer. Adher. 13, 1701–1709 (2019). https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S224529. (PMID: 10.2147/PPA.S224529) Lakdawalla, D.N., Romley, J.A., Sanchez, Y., Maclean, J.R., Penrod, J.R., Philipson, T.: How cancer patients value hope and the implications for cost-effectiveness assessments of high-cost cancer therapies. Health Aff. (Millwood). 31(4), 676–682 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1300. (PMID: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.130022492883) Lin, P.-J., Concannon, T.W., Greenberg, D., Cohen, J.T., Rossi, G., Hille, J., et al.: Does framing of cancer survival affect perceived value of care? A willingness-to-pay survey of US residents. Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 13(4), 513–522 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1586/14737167.2013.814948. (PMID: 10.1586/14737167.2013.81494823977977) Oh, D.Y., Crawford, B., Kim, S.B., Chung, H.C., McDonald, J., Lee, S.Y., et al.: Evaluation of the willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment in Korean metastatic breast cancer patients: A multicenter, cross-sectional study. Asia-Pac. J. Clin. Oncol. 8(3), 282–291 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-7563.2012.01546.x. (PMID: 10.1111/j.1743-7563.2012.01546.x22898238) Meads, D., O’Dwyer, J., Hulme, C., Chintakayala, P., Vinall-Collier, K., Bennett, M.: Patient preferences for pain management in advanced cancer: results from a discrete choice experiment. Patient. 10(5), 643–651 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-017-0236-x. (PMID: 10.1007/s40271-017-0236-x28364385) O’Shea, E., Gannon, B., Kennelly, B.: Eliciting preferences for resource allocation in mental health care in Ireland. Health Policy 88(2–3), 359–370 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2008.03.018. (PMID: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2008.03.01818514355) O'Shea, E., Stewart, J.M., Donaldson, C., Shackley, P. Eliciting preferences for resource allocation in health care. Econ. Soc. Rev. 2001;32(3):217–38. http://www.esr.ie/issue/archive . Augustin, M., Blome, C., Forschner, A., Gutzmer, R., Hauschild, A., Heinzerling, L., et al.: Willingness to pay for a cure of low-risk melanoma patients in Germany. PLoS ONE (2018). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197780. (PMID: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197780302080356135389) Franic, D.M., Pathak, D.S., Gafni, A.: Quality-adjusted life years was a poor predictor of women’s willingness to pay in acute and chronic conditions: results of a survey. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 58(3), 291–303 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.005. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.00515718119) Lang, H.C., Chang, K., Ying, Y.H.: Quality of life, treatments, and patients’ willingness to pay for a complete remission of cervical cancer in Taiwan. Health Econ. (United Kingdom). 21(10), 1217–1233 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1786. (PMID: 10.1002/hec.1786) Lang, H.C.: Willingness to pay for lung cancer treatment. Value in Health. 13(6), 743–749 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00743.x. (PMID: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00743.x20561327) Li, C., Zeliadt, S.B., Hall, I.J., Smith, J.L., Ekwueme, D.U., Moinpour, C.M., et al.: Willingness to pay for prostate cancer treatment among patients and their family members at 1 year after diagnosis. Value Health. 15(5), 716–723 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.03.003. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.03.00322867781) Cho, D., Jo, C.: Preference elicitation approach for measuring the willingness to pay for liver cancer treatment in Korea. Clin Mol Hepatol. 21(3), 268–278 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3350/cmh.2015.21.3.268. (PMID: 10.3350/cmh.2015.21.3.268265232704612288) Gyldmark, M., Morrison, G.C.: Demand for health care in Denmark: Results of a national sample survey using contingent valuation. Soc. Sci. Med. 53(8), 1023–1036 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536%2800%2900398-1. (PMID: 10.1016/S0277-9536%2800%2900398-111556772) Luchini, S., Protiere, C., Moatti, J.P.: Eliciting several willingness to pay in a single contingent valuation survey: application to health care. Health Econ. 12(1), 51–64 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.703. (PMID: 10.1002/hec.70312483760) Romley, J.A., Sanchez, Y., Penrod, J.R., Goldman, D.P.: Survey results show that adults are willing to pay higher insurance premiums for generous coverage of specialty drugs. Health Aff. 31(4), 683–690 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1301. (PMID: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1301) Essers, B.A.B., Dirksen, C.D., Prins, M.H., Neumann, H.A.M.: Assessing the public’s preference for surgical treatment of primary basal cell carcinoma: A discrete-choice experiment in the South of the Netherlands. Dermatol. Surg. 36(12), 1950–1955 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4725.2010.01805.x. (PMID: 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2010.01805.x21070461) Etzkorn, J.R., Tuttle, S.D., Lim, I., Feit, E.M., Sobanko, J.F., Shin, T.M., et al.: Patients prioritize local recurrence risk over other attributes for surgical treatment of facial melanomas-Results of a stated preference survey and choice-based conjoint analysis. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 79(2), 210–9.e3 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2018.02.059. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jaad.2018.02.05929505861) Lee, J.Y., Kim, K., Lee, Y.S., Kim, H.Y., Nam, E.J., Kim, S., et al.: Treatment preferences of advanced ovarian cancer patients for adding bevacizumab to first-line therapy. Gynecol. Oncol. 143(3), 622–627 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.021. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.02127771167) Lalla, D., Carlton, R., Santos, E., Bramley, T., D’Souza, A.: Willingness to pay to avoid metastatic breast cancer treatment side effects: results from a conjoint analysis. Springerplus 3(1), 350 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-350. (PMID: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-350260346634447734) Dranitsaris, G., Leung, P., Ciotti, R., Ortega, A., Spinthouri, M., Liaropoulos, L., et al.: A multinational study to measure the value that patients with cancer place on improved emesis control following cisplatin chemotherapy. Pharmacoeconomics 19(9), 955–967 (2001). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200119090-00007. (PMID: 10.2165/00019053-200119090-0000711700782) Miller, P.J.E., Balu, S., Buchner, D., Walker, M.S., Stepanski, E.J., Schwartzberg, L.S.: Willingness to pay to prevent chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting among patients with breast, lung, or colorectal cancer. J. Med. Econ. 16(10), 1179–1189 (2013). https://doi.org/10.3111/13696998.2013.832257. (PMID: 10.3111/13696998.2013.83225723919632) Johnson, P., Bancroft, T., Barron, R., Legg, J., Li, X., Watson, H., et al.: Discrete choice experiment to estimate breast cancer patients’ preferences and willingness to pay for prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors. Value Health. 17(4), 380–389 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.002. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.00224968998) Teuffel, O., Cheng, S., Ethier, M.C., Diorio, C., Martino, J., Mayo, C., et al.: Health-related quality of life anticipated with different management strategies for febrile neutropenia in adult cancer patients. Support. Care Cancer 20(11), 2755–2764 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1397-8. (PMID: 10.1007/s00520-012-1397-822350594) Bernard, M., Brignone, M., Adehossi, A., Pefoura, S., Briquet, C., Chouaid, C., et al.: Perception of alopecia by patients requiring chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer: A willingness to pay study. Lung Cancer 72(1), 114–118 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.07.004. (PMID: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.07.00420701993) Regier, D.A., Diorio, C., Ethier, M.C., Alli, A., Alexander, S., Boydell, K.M., et al.: Discrete choice experiment to evaluate factors that influence preferences for antibiotic prophylaxis in pediatric oncology. PLoS ONE (2012). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047470. (PMID: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047470231852393502419) Ha, T.V., Hoang, M.V., Vu, M.Q., Hoang, N.A.T., Khuong, L.Q., Vu, A.N., et al.: Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year among advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients in Viet Nam, 2018. Medicine (United States). (2020). https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000019379. (PMID: 10.1097/MD.0000000000019379336238939188940) Leighl, N.B., Tsao, W.S., Zawisza, D.L., Nematollahi, M., Shepherd, F.A.: A willingness-to-pay study of oral epidermal growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 51(1), 115–121 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2005.08.005. (PMID: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2005.08.00516188343) Havet, N., Morelle, M., Remonnay, R., Carrere, M.-O.: Cancer patients' willingness to pay for blood transfusions at home: results from a contingent valuation study in a French Cancer Network. Eur. J. Health Econ. 2012;13(3):289–300. https://link.springer.com/journal/volumesAndIssues/10198. Davidson, B.A., Ehrisman, J., Reed, S.D., Yang, J.C., Buchanan, A., Havrilesky, L.J.: Preferences of women with epithelial ovarian cancer for aspects of genetic testing. Gynecol. Oncol. Res. Pract. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40661-019-0066-8. (PMID: 10.1186/s40661-019-0066-8306930906341581) Aristides, M., Chen, J., Schulz, M., Williamson, E., Clarke, S., Grant, K.: Conjoint analysis of a new Chemotherapy: willingness to pay and preference for the features of raltitrexed versus standard therapy in advanced Colorectal Cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 20(11), 775–784 (2002). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200220110-00006. (PMID: 10.2165/00019053-200220110-0000612201796) Erdem, S., Thompson, C.: Prioritising health service innovation investments using public preferences: a discrete choice experiment. BMC Health Serv. Res. 14, 360 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-360. (PMID: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-360251679264166469) Najafzadeh, M., Johnston, K.M., Peacock, S.J., Connors, J.M., Marra, M.A., Lynd, L.D., et al.: Genomic testing to determine drug response: measuring preferences of the public and patients using Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE). BMC Health Serv. Res. 13, 454 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-454. (PMID: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-454241760503827922) Ngorsuraches, S.T.K.: Breast cancer patients’ preferences and willingness to pay for mtor inhibitors. J Am Pharm Assoc 55(2), e124–e5 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1331/JAPhA.2015.15515. (PMID: 10.1331/JAPhA.2015.15515) Bien, D.R., Danner, M., Vennedey, V., Civello, D., Evers, S.M., Hiligsmann, M.: Patients’ Preferences for Outcome, Process and Cost Attributes in Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments. Patient. 10(5), 553–565 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-017-0235-y. (PMID: 10.1007/s40271-017-0235-y283643875605613) Worldwide Palliative Care Alliance. Global Atlas of Palliative Care 2020. Smith, R.D.: Construction of the contingent valuation market in health care: a critical assessment. Health Econ. 12(8), 609–628 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.755. (PMID: 10.1002/hec.75512898660) Bayoumi, A.M.: The measurement of contingent valuation for health economics. Pharmacoeconomics 22(11), 691–700 (2004). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422110-00001. (PMID: 10.2165/00019053-200422110-0000115250748) Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P.R., Leamer, E.E., Radner, R., Schuman, H.: Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed. Reg. 58(10), 4601–4614 (1993). Harrison, G. W. Contingent valuation meets the experts: a critique of the NOAA Panel Report 2002. Ryan, M., Scott, D.A., Donaldson, C.: Valuing health care using willingness to pay: a comparison of the payment card and dichotomous choice methods. J. Health Econ. 23(2), 237–258 (2004). (PMID: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2003.09.003) Ryan, M., Watson, V., Entwistle, V.: Rationalising the “irrational”: a think aloud study of discrete choice experiment responses. Health Econ. 18(3), 321–336 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1369. (PMID: 10.1002/hec.136918651601) Bijlenga, D., Bonsel, G.J., Birnie, E.: Eliciting willingness to pay in obstetrics: comparing a direct and an indirect valuation method for complex health outcomes. Health Econ. 20(11), 1392–1406 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1678. (PMID: 10.1002/hec.167820967891) Howard, K., Salkeld, G.: Does attribute framing in discrete choice experiments influence willingness to pay? Results from a discrete choice experiment in screening for colorectal cancer. Value in Health. 12(2), 354–363 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00417.x. (PMID: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00417.x18657102) Hauber, A.B., Gonzalez, J.M., Groothuis-Oudshoorn, C.G., Prior, T., Marshall, D.A., Cunningham, C., et al.: Statistical methods for the analysis of discrete choice experiments: a Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 19(4), 300–315 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.004. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.00427325321) Reed Johnson, F., Lancsar, E., Marshall, D., Kilambi, V., Muhlbacher, A., Regier, D.A., et al.: Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 16(1), 3–13 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2223. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.222323337210) Bridges, J.F., Hauber, A.B., Marshall, D., Lloyd, A., Prosser, L.A., Regier, D.A., et al.: Conjoint analysis applications in health—a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 14(4), 403–413 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.01321669364) |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: Cancer treatment; Contingent valuation; Discrete choice experiment; Quality of life; Stated preference; Systematic review; Willingness to pay |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20211202 Date Completed: 20220725 Latest Revision: 20220725 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20221213 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10198-021-01407-9 |
| PMID: | 34853930 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Find this article in full text from Springer Verlag. 
Full Text Finder كن أول من يترك تعليقا!