Willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma patients in Vietnam

Các tác giả

  • Nguyen Tran Nhu Y Hong Bang International University
  • Phan Gia Huy University of medicine and pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
  • Pham Xuan Dung Ho Chi Minh City Oncology Hospital, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
  • Dang The Thap Hong Bang International University
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59294/HIUJS.VOL.7.2024.681

Từ khóa:

Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, Willingness to pay, quality-adjusted life year

Tóm tắt

Objectives: To estimate Willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year (WTP/QALY) of patients with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) and analyze related factors to WTP/QALY of NHL patients. Patients and methods: Cross-sectional study has been conducted based on surveying NHL patients, satisfying inclusion and exclusion criteria in 5 specialized hospitals of Vietnam from March to August 2018. The structured questionnaire on socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, EQ-5D-5L and WTP were built to directly interview patients. Regression and correlation analysis have been conducted to estimate the related factors to WTP/QALY. The data were analyzed with relevant statistical tests and simple linear regression using SPSS 20.0 statistical software provided by International Business Machines (IBM) - New York, United State of America. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Sample included 516 NHL patients with the ratio of men: women of 1.37:1, the average age of 53.57 ± 14.37 years old, the average time of NHL onset of 1.32 ± 0.63 years. The median value of WTP/QALY was accounted for 45,604,698.96 (0.00 – 187,311,321.74) VND/QALY. With the confidence interval of 95%, the statistically significant differences in LogWTP/QALY have been found between men and women (0.179; 95% CI: 0.023 – 0.335; p = 0.025); fulltime- working patients and non-working patients (0.270; 95% CI: 0.275 – 0.512; p = 0.022), intellectual workers and unemployed/ housewife/ disability patients (0.555; 95% CI: 0.095 – 1.014; p = 0.009); lost-income and unlost-income status (0.267; 95% CI: 0.090 – 0.445; p = 0.003), family income (r = 0.272, p = 0.000) and patient income (r = 0.288, p = 0.000), HR-QoL (r = 0.436; p = 0.000). Linear regression analysis with 95% reliability showed R2= 0.291; p = 0.000 with two related factors to LogWTP/QALY including HR-QoL coefficient (β = 1.339; p = 0.000) and family income (β = 8.50 x 10-9; p = 0.014). Conclusion: The median value of WTP/QALY was accounted for 45,604,698.96 (0.00 – 187,311,321.74) VND/QALY. With the confidence interval of 95%, linear regression analysis showed two related factors to LogWTP/QALY including HR-QoL coefficient and family income.

Abstract

Objectives: To estimate Willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year (WTP/QALY) of patients with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) and analyze related factors to WTP/QALY of NHL patients. Patients and methods: Cross-sectional study has been conducted based on surveying NHL patients, satisfying inclusion and exclusion criteria in 5 specialized hospitals of Vietnam from March to August 2018. The structured questionnaire on socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, EQ-5D-5L and WTP were built to directly interview patients. Regression and correlation analysis have been conducted to estimate the related factors to WTP/QALY. The data were analyzed with relevant statistical tests and simple linear regression using SPSS 20.0 statistical software provided by International Business Machines (IBM) - New York, United State of America. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Sample included 516 NHL patients with the ratio of men: women of 1.37:1, the average age of 53.57 ± 14.37 years old, the average time of NHL onset of 1.32 ± 0.63 years. The median value of WTP/QALY was accounted for 45,604,698.96 (0.00 – 187,311,321.74) VND/QALY. With the confidence interval of 95%, the statistically significant differences in LogWTP/QALY have been found between men and women (0.179; 95% CI: 0.023 – 0.335; p = 0.025); fulltime- working patients and non-working patients (0.270; 95% CI: 0.275 – 0.512; p = 0.022), intellectual workers and unemployed/ housewife/ disability patients (0.555; 95% CI: 0.095 – 1.014; p = 0.009); lost-income and unlost-income status (0.267; 95% CI: 0.090 – 0.445; p = 0.003), family income (r = 0.272, p = 0.000) and patient income (r = 0.288, p = 0.000), HR-QoL (r = 0.436; p = 0.000). Linear regression analysis with 95% reliability showed R2= 0.291; p = 0.000 with two related factors to LogWTP/QALY including HR-QoL coefficient (β = 1.339; p = 0.000) and family income (β = 8.50 x 10-9; p = 0.014). Conclusion: The median value of WTP/QALY was accounted for 45,604,698.96 (0.00 – 187,311,321.74) VND/QALY. With the confidence interval of 95%, linear regression analysis showed two related factors to LogWTP/QALY including HR-QoL coefficient and family income.

Tài liệu tham khảo

[1] Sheets SSF. Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma. Natl Cancer Inst 2015.

[2] K. R. Shankland, J. O Armitage and B. W. Hancock, “Non-Hodgkin lymphoma”, The Lancet 380, p. 848–857, 2012

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60605-9

[3] J. O. Armitage, R. D. Gascoyne,… and F. Cavalli, “Non-Hodgkin lymphoma”, The Lancet 390, p. 298–310, 2017.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32407-2

[4] S. M. Ansell and J. Armitage, “Non-Hodgkin lymphoma: Diagnosis and treatment”, In Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2005.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4065/80.8.1087

[5] A. W. Glaser, L. K. Fraser and J. Corner, “Patient-reported outcomes of cancer survivors in England 1–5 years after diag- nosis: A cross-sectional survey””, BMJ open 3, pii: e002317, 2013. URL 10.1136/bmjopen- 2012-002317.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002317

[6] S. Masaki, R. Tatsukawa and M. Uryu, “Treatment satisfaction, willingness to pay and quality of life in Japanese patients with psoriasis”, The Journal of dermatology, 44, 2017, 143–146.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1346-8138.13541

[7] J. Brazier, J. Roberts, and M. Deverill, “The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36”, Journal of health economics, 21, p.271–292, 2002.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6296(01)00130-8

[8] W. J. Furlong, D. H. Feeny,… and R. D. Barr, “The Health utilities index (HUI®) system for assessing health-related quality of life in clinical studies”, Annals of medicine, 33, p. 375–384, 2001.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002092

[9] G. Richardson and A. Manca, “Calculation of quality adjusted life years in the published literature: a review of methodology and transparency”, Health economics, 13, p.1203–1210, 2004.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.901

[10] S. J. Walters and J. E. Brazier, “Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D”, Quality of life research, 14, p. 1523–1532, 2005.

[11] R. E. Jensen, N. K. Arora,... and K. M. Bellizzi, “Health-related quality of life among survivors of aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma”, Cancer, 119, 672–680, 2013. URL 10.1002/cncr.27781.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27781

[12] K. M. Bellizzi, J. H. Rowland,… and N. M. Aziz, “Physical activity and quality of life in adult survivors of Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma”, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 960, 2009.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.5026

[13] D. Kang, J. Cho, M. K. K. Im Ryung, …and S. J. Kim, “Health-Related quality of life in Non-Hodgkin lymphoma survivors: A prospective cohort study”, Cancer research and treatment: official journal of Korean Cancer Association, 50, 1051, 2018.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2017.207

[14] L. H. Nguyen and A. T. D. Hoang, “Willingness to pay for social health insurance in central Vietnam”, Frontiers in public health, 5, 89, 2017.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00089

[15] K. Nimdet and S. Ngorsuraches, “Willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year for life-saving treatments in Thailand”, BMJ open, 5, e008123, 2015.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008123

[16] J. Doorduijn, I. Buijt,...and P. Sonneveld, “Self-reported quality of life in elderly patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma treated with CHOP chemotherapy”, European journal of haematology, 75, 116–123, 2005.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0609.2005.00438.x

[17] Group TE., “EuroQoL-A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life”, Health policy, 16, 199–208, 1990

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9

[18] N. K. Aaronson, S. Ahmedzai,... and B. Bergman, “The European organization for research and Treatment of can- cer QLQ-C30: A quality of life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology,” JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85, 365–376, 1993.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/85.5.365

[19] E. Smets, B. Garssen, A. Cull and J. De Haes, “Application of the multidimensional fatigue inventory (MFI-20) in cancer patients receiving radiotherapy”, British journal of cancer, 73, 241, 1996

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1996.42

[20] M. Jefford, A. C. Ward,…and K. Lisy, “Patient-reported outcomes in cancer survivors: a population-wide cross-sectional study”, Supportive Care in Cancer, 25, p. 3171–3179, 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3725-5

[21] K. Blumenschein and M. Johannesson, “Relationship between quality-of-life instruments, health state utilities, and willingness to pay in patients with asthma. Annals of allergy, asthma,” Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology, 80, p.189–194, 1998.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1081-1206(10)62954-7

[22] T. T. Nguyen, T. T Nguyen and T. T Than, “Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year of outpatients with cardiovascular diseases”, Value in Health, 19, A658–A659, 2016.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.09.1794

[23] T. A. Lieu, G. T. Ray,… and D. Rusinak, “Willingness to pay for a QALY based on community member and patient preferences for temporary health states associated with herpes zoster”, Pharmacoeconomics, 27, 1005–1016, 2009.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/11314000-000000000-00000

[24] S. J. Walter and J. E. Brazier, “Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D”, Quality of life research, 14, p. 1523–1532, 2005.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-004-7713-0

[25] A. Oppe, M. Devlin and N. J. Szende, “EQ-5D value sets: inventory, comparative review and user guide”, EQ-5D value sets: Inventory, comparative review and user guide, 2007.
[26] S. J. Whitehead and S. Ali, “Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities”, British medical bulletin, 96, p. 5–21, 2010.
[27] J. Martín-Fernández, E. Polentinos-Castro,...and M. I. Cura-González, “Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: An evaluation of attitudes towards risk and preferences”, BMC health services research, 287, 2014.

Tải xuống

Xem tóm tắt: 473
Tải file: 158

Đã Xuất bản

19.12.2024

Cách trích dẫn

[1]
N. T. N. Y, P. G. Huy, P. X. Dung, và D. T. Thap, “Willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma patients in Vietnam”, HIUJS, vol 7, tr 11–20, tháng 12 2024.

Số

Chuyên mục

HEALTH SCIENCES

Các bài báo được đọc nhiều nhất của cùng tác giả

Các bài báo tương tự

<< < 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 > >> 

Bạn cũng có thể bắt đầu một tìm kiếm tương tự nâng cao cho bài báo này.