Perceptions of Cisplatin-Related Toxicity among Ovarian Cancer Patients and Gynecologic Oncologists

Calhoun, Elizabeth A.; Bennett, Charles L.; Peeples, Patti A.; Lurain, John R.; Roland, Philip Y.; Weinstein, Jill M.; Fishman, David A.

doi:10.1006/gyno.1998.5189

Cited by 25 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study is the first to report utility scores reflecting the female societal preference for current treatment options for earlystage cervical cancer [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]. We found that health states describing chemoradiation were ranked lower than health states describing surgery regardless of adjuvant chemoradiation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Utility Scores and Treatment Preferences for Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Utility Scores and Treatment Preferences for Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[6] [7–10, 13, 14] These have often addressed specific clinical questions but may not have always been appropriate for use in more general cost-effectiveness analyses conducted for informing policy decisions. For example, in performing a cost-utility analysis of two primary chemotherapy regimens for treatment of ovarian cancer[6], Ortega et al (1997) incorporated both a specific chemotherapy regimen and the patient’s disease status into each health state description, such that the resulting utilities are not easily generalizable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We found that patients usually assigned a higher preference to chemotherapy-associated states than did volunteers. Similarly, Calhoun et al (1998) previously evaluated physician and patient preferences for ototoxicity, nephrotoxicity, and neurotoxicity of increasing severity (5 states for each toxicity)[13] and found that physician-assigned utilities were markedly lower than those assigned by patients. This may indicate clinicians’ bias toward withholding potentially toxic treatments due to perception of a lower QoL associated with treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of quality of life-related utilities for health states relevant to ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment

Havrilesky

Broadwater

Davis

et al. 2009

Gynecologic Oncology

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives-(1) To define a set of health state descriptions related to screening, diagnosis, prognosis, and toxicities relevant to ovarian cancer; (2) To derive a set of quality of life-related utilities to be used for cost-effectiveness analyses.Methods-A comprehensive list of health states was developed to represent the experiences of diagnostic testing for ovarian cancer, natural history of ovarian cancer (e.g., newly diagnosed early stage ovarian cancer, recurrent progressive ovarian cancer) and the most common chemotherapyrelated toxicities (e.g. alopecia, peripheral neuropathy, pain, neutropenia, fatigue). Valuation of each health state was obtained through individual interviews of 13 ovarian cancer patients and 37 female members of the general public. Interviews employed visual analog score (VAS) and time trade off (TTO) methods of health state valuation.Results-Mean TTO-derived utilities were higher than VAS-derived utilities by 0.118 units (p<0.0001). Mean VAS-derived utilities for screening tests were 0.83 and 0.81 for true negative blood test and ultrasound; 0.79 and 0.78 for false negative blood test and ultrasound, respectively. Patients and volunteers generally agreed in their preference ranking of chemotherapy-associated states, with lowest rankings being given to febrile neutropenia, grade 3-4 fatigue, and grade 3-4 nausea/vomiting. For 55% of chemotherapy-associated health states the average utility assigned was higher for patients than for volunteers. Conflict of Interest StatementThe authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. Conclusions-This study establishes societal preferences for a number of health states related to screening, diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer that can be used for assessing the costeffectiveness of different ovarian cancer screening and treatment regimens. NIH Public Access

show abstract

“…12 The major clinical symptom of hematologic toxicity is anemia that severely affects patients' QoL. 12 The major clinical symptom of hematologic toxicity is anemia that severely affects patients' QoL.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized Study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Ovarian Cancer Study Group Comparing Quality of Life in Patients With Ovarian Cancer Treated With Cisplatin/Paclitaxel Versus Carboplatin/Paclitaxel

Greimel

Bjelic‐Radisic

Pfisterer

et al. 2006

JCO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Perceptions of Cisplatin-Related Toxicity among Ovarian Cancer Patients and Gynecologic Oncologists

Cited by 25 publications

References 19 publications

Utility Scores and Treatment Preferences for Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Utility Scores and Treatment Preferences for Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer

Determination of quality of life-related utilities for health states relevant to ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment

Randomized Study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Ovarian Cancer Study Group Comparing Quality of Life in Patients With Ovarian Cancer Treated With Cisplatin/Paclitaxel Versus Carboplatin/Paclitaxel

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About