了解生存率的上限,以指导和批判性地评估低风险癌症的经济评估。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Xuanqian Xie, Ishita Joshi, Myra Wang, Chunmei Li
{"title":"了解生存率的上限,以指导和批判性地评估低风险癌症的经济评估。","authors":"Xuanqian Xie, Ishita Joshi, Myra Wang, Chunmei Li","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2522326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In most developed countries, overall survival rates for low-risk cancers (e.g. localized prostate and thyroid cancer) are comparable to those of the general population. The general population's survival rate may serve as an upper bound for survival in people with these cancers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>By applying this concept, we demonstrated limitations of using Markov models for low-risk cancers and proposed an alternative modeling approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Markov disease progression models typically depict a gradual progression from early to advanced cancer stages and an increasing risk of cancer-specific mortality over time. However, data showed that the risk of death from cancer was often the greatest within the first few years following diagnosis. We therefore proposed an alternative modeling approach. This method involves calculating the average quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from the integrals of the survival curve, multiplied by the corresponding health utility curve. Alternatively, QALYs may be estimated by averaging survival and utility within each time interval and summing these estimates across intervals. We also applied these concepts to the critical appraisal of published economic evaluations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Understanding the upper bound of survival for low-risk cancers enables health economists to more accurately conduct cost-effectiveness analyses and assess the credibility of published economic evaluations. [Figure: see text].</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1011-1020"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding the upper bound of survival for conducting and critically appraising economic evaluations of low-risk cancers.\",\"authors\":\"Xuanqian Xie, Ishita Joshi, Myra Wang, Chunmei Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14737167.2025.2522326\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In most developed countries, overall survival rates for low-risk cancers (e.g. localized prostate and thyroid cancer) are comparable to those of the general population. The general population's survival rate may serve as an upper bound for survival in people with these cancers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>By applying this concept, we demonstrated limitations of using Markov models for low-risk cancers and proposed an alternative modeling approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Markov disease progression models typically depict a gradual progression from early to advanced cancer stages and an increasing risk of cancer-specific mortality over time. However, data showed that the risk of death from cancer was often the greatest within the first few years following diagnosis. We therefore proposed an alternative modeling approach. This method involves calculating the average quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from the integrals of the survival curve, multiplied by the corresponding health utility curve. Alternatively, QALYs may be estimated by averaging survival and utility within each time interval and summing these estimates across intervals. We also applied these concepts to the critical appraisal of published economic evaluations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Understanding the upper bound of survival for low-risk cancers enables health economists to more accurately conduct cost-effectiveness analyses and assess the credibility of published economic evaluations. [Figure: see text].</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1011-1020\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2522326\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2522326","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在大多数发达国家,低风险癌症(如局限性前列腺癌和甲状腺癌)的总体生存率与普通人群相当。一般人群的存活率可能是这些癌症患者存活的上限。方法:通过应用这一概念,我们证明了在低风险癌症中使用马尔可夫模型的局限性,并提出了一种替代的建模方法。结果:马尔可夫疾病进展模型通常描述了从早期到晚期癌症阶段的逐渐进展,并且随着时间的推移,癌症特异性死亡率的风险增加。然而,数据显示,在确诊后的头几年里,死于癌症的风险往往是最高的。因此,我们提出了另一种建模方法。该方法通过生存曲线的积分乘以相应的健康效用曲线来计算平均质量调整生命年(QALYs)。或者,qaly可以通过在每个时间间隔内平均生存和效用并将这些估计值跨时间间隔相加来估计。我们还将这些概念应用于对已发表的经济评估的批判性评估。结论:了解低风险癌症的生存上限使卫生经济学家能够更准确地进行成本效益分析,并评估已发表的经济评估的可信度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Understanding the upper bound of survival for conducting and critically appraising economic evaluations of low-risk cancers.

Background: In most developed countries, overall survival rates for low-risk cancers (e.g. localized prostate and thyroid cancer) are comparable to those of the general population. The general population's survival rate may serve as an upper bound for survival in people with these cancers.

Methods: By applying this concept, we demonstrated limitations of using Markov models for low-risk cancers and proposed an alternative modeling approach.

Results: Markov disease progression models typically depict a gradual progression from early to advanced cancer stages and an increasing risk of cancer-specific mortality over time. However, data showed that the risk of death from cancer was often the greatest within the first few years following diagnosis. We therefore proposed an alternative modeling approach. This method involves calculating the average quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from the integrals of the survival curve, multiplied by the corresponding health utility curve. Alternatively, QALYs may be estimated by averaging survival and utility within each time interval and summing these estimates across intervals. We also applied these concepts to the critical appraisal of published economic evaluations.

Conclusions: Understanding the upper bound of survival for low-risk cancers enables health economists to more accurately conduct cost-effectiveness analyses and assess the credibility of published economic evaluations. [Figure: see text].

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信