2012
DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quality-adjusted life years in cancer: pros, cons, and alternatives

Abstract: High and rising cancer treatment costs have forced a discussion about the use of cost-effectiveness analyses and other approaches to assess the value of cancer care. Oncologists have traditionally resisted using economic considerations in day-to-day medical considerations, though unavoidably their decisions have important resource implications, and increasingly economic realities are impacting their actions. In this paper, we summarise the use of the quality-adjusted life years to assess the value of cancer ca… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…92,93 Nevertheless, their use in guiding health care decisions around the world is prevalent. 94 Recently, a cost-effectiveness analysis of the Assessment of Surgical Staging versus Endoscopic Ultrasound in Lung Cancer: a randomized clinical trial (the ASTER Study) from 3 European countries was published by Rintoul and colleagues. 95 In all 3 countries, the use of EBUS/EUS staging had lower mean cost and greater mean QALYs.…”
Section: Cost Analysis Of Ebus-tbnamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…92,93 Nevertheless, their use in guiding health care decisions around the world is prevalent. 94 Recently, a cost-effectiveness analysis of the Assessment of Surgical Staging versus Endoscopic Ultrasound in Lung Cancer: a randomized clinical trial (the ASTER Study) from 3 European countries was published by Rintoul and colleagues. 95 In all 3 countries, the use of EBUS/EUS staging had lower mean cost and greater mean QALYs.…”
Section: Cost Analysis Of Ebus-tbnamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of QALYs or other similar measures to establish a threshold for the type of health care that is either cost effective or recommended is now forbidden in the United States under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act . Nevertheless, their use in guiding health care decisions around the world is prevalent . Recently, a cost‐effectiveness analysis of the Assessment of Surgical Staging versus Endoscopic Ultrasound in Lung Cancer: a randomized clinical trial (the ASTER Study) from 3 European countries was published by Rintoul and colleagues .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of costs per QALY's is vital in value‐based decision making (Woodward et al . ). Using real‐world data in cost‐effectiveness models can result in better evidence regarding effectiveness, quality of life and costs for Dutch policy makers by addressing uncertainty in outcomes arising from the gap between clinical trials and everyday practice.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Frameworks that use QALYs are limited by their reliance on the assumption of a universal weighting for each outcome dimension or cost metric. 10,11 An effective value framework must be accessible to various stakeholders including patients, providers, payers, employers, administrators, and policy makers. Each stakeholder has a different set of priorities and perspectives, which naturally place different weights on each metric.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Traditionally, cost metrics have relied on surrogate measurements such as procedure charges and reimbursements, which do not reflect the true underlying cost to the provider to deliver care. 911 To generate a more accurate assessment of the actual consumption of resources throughout a full treatment cycle, the concept of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) has been successfully applied in healthcare. 1217 …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%