Discriminatory Properties of Quality-Adjusted Life Year Based Cost-Effectiveness Analyses for Patients With Disabilities: A Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Case Study.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Alexa C Klimchak, Lauren E Sedita, Eleanor M Perfetto, Katherine L Gooch, Daniel C Malone
{"title":"Discriminatory Properties of Quality-Adjusted Life Year Based Cost-Effectiveness Analyses for Patients With Disabilities: A Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Case Study.","authors":"Alexa C Klimchak, Lauren E Sedita, Eleanor M Perfetto, Katherine L Gooch, Daniel C Malone","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) have been challenged as a measure of benefit for people with disabilities, particularly for those in low-utility health states or with irreversible disability. This study examined the impact of a QALY-based assessment on the price for a hypothetical treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), a progressive, genetic neuromuscular disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A previously published, 5-state model, which analyzed treatments for early ambulatory (EA) DMD patients, was replicated, validated, and adapted to include early nonambulatory (ENA) DMD patients. The model was used to assess a QALY-based threshold price (maximum cost-effective price) for a hypothetical treatment for 13-year-old ENA and 5-year-old EA patients (initial health states with lower and higher utility, respectively). All inputs were replicated including willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50 000 to $200 000/QALY.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In contrast to EA patients, ENA patients had a 98% modeled decline in QALY-based threshold price at a willingness-to-pay of $150 000/QALY or higher, despite equal treatment benefit (delayed progression/death). At $100 000/QALY or lower, net nontreatment costs exceeded health benefits, implying any treatment for ENA patients would not be considered cost-effective, even at $0 price, including an indefinite pause in disease progression.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For certain severe, disabling conditions, traditional approaches are likely to conclude that treatments are not cost-effective at any price once a patient progresses to a disabled health state with low utility value. These findings elucidate theoretical/ethical concerns regarding potential discriminatory properties of traditional QALY assessments for people with disabilities, particularly those who have lost ambulation or have other physical limitations.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.008","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) have been challenged as a measure of benefit for people with disabilities, particularly for those in low-utility health states or with irreversible disability. This study examined the impact of a QALY-based assessment on the price for a hypothetical treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), a progressive, genetic neuromuscular disease.

Methods: A previously published, 5-state model, which analyzed treatments for early ambulatory (EA) DMD patients, was replicated, validated, and adapted to include early nonambulatory (ENA) DMD patients. The model was used to assess a QALY-based threshold price (maximum cost-effective price) for a hypothetical treatment for 13-year-old ENA and 5-year-old EA patients (initial health states with lower and higher utility, respectively). All inputs were replicated including willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50 000 to $200 000/QALY.

Results: In contrast to EA patients, ENA patients had a 98% modeled decline in QALY-based threshold price at a willingness-to-pay of $150 000/QALY or higher, despite equal treatment benefit (delayed progression/death). At $100 000/QALY or lower, net nontreatment costs exceeded health benefits, implying any treatment for ENA patients would not be considered cost-effective, even at $0 price, including an indefinite pause in disease progression.

Conclusions: For certain severe, disabling conditions, traditional approaches are likely to conclude that treatments are not cost-effective at any price once a patient progresses to a disabled health state with low utility value. These findings elucidate theoretical/ethical concerns regarding potential discriminatory properties of traditional QALY assessments for people with disabilities, particularly those who have lost ambulation or have other physical limitations.

基于 QALY 的 CEA 对残疾患者的鉴别特性:杜氏肌肉萎缩症个案研究。
目的:质量调整生命年(QALYs)作为衡量残疾人获益的标准一直受到质疑,尤其是那些处于低效用健康状态或有不可逆转残疾的人。本研究探讨了基于 QALY 的评估对杜兴氏肌营养不良症(DMD)(一种进行性遗传神经肌肉疾病)假定治疗价格的影响:复制、验证并调整了之前发表的五国模型,该模型分析了早期非卧床 (EA) DMD 患者的治疗方法,并将早期非卧床 (ENA) DMD 患者也纳入其中。该模型用于评估 13 岁 ENA 和 5 岁 EA 患者(初始健康状况分别为效用较低和较高)假设治疗的基于 QALY 的阈值价格(最高成本效益价格)。所有投入都是重复的,包括 50,000 至 200,000 美元/QALY 的支付意愿(WTP)阈值:结果:与 EA 患者相比,ENA 患者在 WTP 为 15 万美元/QALY 或更高时,尽管治疗效果相同(病情恶化/死亡延迟),但基于 QALY 的阈值价格模型下降了 98%。在100,000美元/QALY或更低的情况下,非治疗净成本超过了健康收益,这意味着对ENA患者的任何治疗都不会被认为具有成本效益,即使是0美元的价格,包括无限期暂停疾病进展:结论:对于某些严重的致残性疾病,传统方法很可能会得出这样的结论:一旦患者的健康状况发展到致残状态,且效用价值较低,那么无论采用何种价格,治疗都不具有成本效益。这些发现从理论/伦理角度阐明了传统 QALY 评估对残疾人,尤其是失去行动能力或有其他身体限制的残疾人的潜在歧视性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信