ReviewPharmacoEconomics2011
Using QALYs in cancer: a review of the methodological limitations.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Dimensions Used in Instruments for QALY Calculation: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Whom should we ask? A systematic literature review of the arguments regarding the most accurate source of information for valuation of health states.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Treatments for the Management of Bone Metastases: A Systematic Literature Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Pooled it
- Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency.BMC health services research · 2014Pooled it
- Health-related Quality of Life in Patients with Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression.Orthopaedic surgery · 2016Trial
- Cancer-specific or generic preference-based measures in oncology? A validity comparison across six commonly diagnosed cancers.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Differences in health state valuation for small, low-risk thyroid cancer between general population and cancer survivors: a cross-sectional analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Trajectory of quality of life among patients with cancer at the end of life: a longitudinal survey study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Assessing the reliability of a novel cancer-specific multi-attribute utility instrument (FACT-8D) and comparing its validity to EQ-5D-5L in colorectal cancer patients.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Chinese utility weights for the EORTC cancer-specific utility instrument QLU-C10D.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- The impact of willingness-to-pay threshold on price reduction recommendations for oncology drugs: a review of assessments conducted by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2024Review
- Measuring the Wellbeing of Cancer Patients with Generic and Disease-Specific Instruments.Cancers · 2023Article
- Cost effectiveness and health-related quality of life of chemoradiotherapy versus radiation therapy alone in elderly head and neck cancer patients.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2022Article
- Trimodal therapy vs. radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A Markov microsimulation model.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2022Article
- Building resilience in oncology teams: Protocol for a realist evaluation of multiple cases.PloS one · 2022Article
- Comparison of EQ-5D-3L with QLU-C10D in Metastatic Melanoma Using Cost-Utility Analysis.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2021Article
- Survival-Weighted Health Profiles in Patients Treated for Advanced Oral Cavity Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Health utilities in cancer patients: A study protocol for a prospective, longitudinal cohort using online survey.Medicine · 2019Article
- Testing alternative regression models to predict utilities: mapping the QLQ-C30 onto the EQ-5D-5L and the SF-6D.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to examine how well the QALY captures the health gains generated by cancer treatments, with particular focus on the methods for constructing QALYs preferred by the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Data were obtained using a keyword search of the MEDLINE database and a hand search of articles written by leading researchers in the subject area (with follow up of the references in these articles). Key arguments were discussed and developed at an oncology workshop in September 2009 at the Office of Health Economics. Three key issues emerged. First, the EQ-5D, NICE's preferred measure of health-related quality of life (QOL) in adults, has been found to be relatively insensitive to changes in health status of cancer patients. Second, the time trade-off, NICE's preferred technique for estimating the values of health states, involves making assumptions that are likely to be violated in end-of-life scenarios. Third, the practice of using valuations of members of the general population, as recommended by NICE, is problematic because such individuals typically display a misunderstanding of what it is really like for patients to live with cancer. Because of the way in which it is constructed, the QALY shows important limitations in terms of its ability to accurately capture the value of the health gains deemed important by cancer patients. A research agenda for addressing these limitations is proposed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21599035What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.