2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.12.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of Bladder Cancer on UK Healthcare Costs and Patient Health-Related Quality of Life: Evidence From the BOXIT Trial

Abstract: Background Limited evidence exists regarding the cost and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) effects of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) recurrence and progression to muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). We examined these effects using evidence from a recent randomized control trial. Material and Methods The costs and HRQoL associated with bladder cancer were assessed using data from the BOXIT trial (bladder COX-2 inhibition trial; n = 472). The cost and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
33
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In each case we use a common estimation model for costs and QALYs, and standard off-the-shelf software. Previous tutorial papers (1-3) compared case-analysis (CCA) (8)(9)(10), multiple Imputation (MI) (8,(10)(11)(12) and repeated measure mixed model (RMM) (13). This study extends this previous methodological work by including a Bayesian parametric approach using the R package missingHE (BPA) (14) and examining the results over different time horizons (and hence with different quantities of missing data) of 1, 3 and 5 years.…”
Section: Comparing Methods For Handling Missing Cost and Outcome Data In Clinical Trial-based Cost-effectiveness Analysis 1 Introductionmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In each case we use a common estimation model for costs and QALYs, and standard off-the-shelf software. Previous tutorial papers (1-3) compared case-analysis (CCA) (8)(9)(10), multiple Imputation (MI) (8,(10)(11)(12) and repeated measure mixed model (RMM) (13). This study extends this previous methodological work by including a Bayesian parametric approach using the R package missingHE (BPA) (14) and examining the results over different time horizons (and hence with different quantities of missing data) of 1, 3 and 5 years.…”
Section: Comparing Methods For Handling Missing Cost and Outcome Data In Clinical Trial-based Cost-effectiveness Analysis 1 Introductionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…More complex error structures and functional forms are possible, (19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25) but are not explored here. RMM and related approaches such as Generalized Estimating Equations are widely used for unbalanced longitudinal data but, with few exceptions (13), have not been widely used for cost-effectiveness analysis.…”
Section: Comparing Methods For Handling Missing Cost and Outcome Data In Clinical Trial-based Cost-effectiveness Analysis 1 Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, these findings are in contrast with the respective literature reports. In the BOXIT trial, patients with no NMIBC progression or recurrence reached a minimal EQ-5D score at 2 months postoperatively, with no further improvement (27). Similarly data from a multicenter prospective cohort trial reported a plateau in the SF-36 mental and physical scores throughout the study period (26).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Following treatment for diagnosed bladder cancer, follow‐up by means of cystoscopic surveillance is required for many years. For non‐muscle‐invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), the 3 year total costs per person for surveillance alone are estimated to be over £4500, with additional costs for any recurrence or progression 13 …”
Section: Introduction and Objectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), the 3 year total costs per person for surveillance alone are estimated to be over £4500, with additional costs for any recurrence or progression. 13 Risk grouping/stratifying models, probability nomograms, and artificial neural networks are all methods by which urologists have hoped to reduce the amount of unnecessary investigations that are performed and to help better focus resources on patients who truly require them. 14 However, these methods, no matter how much collective data are inputted, are generic and not patient specific, and will therefore result in some patients being incorrectly stratified.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%