Difference in restricted mean survival time for cost-effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta-analysis: Evidence from a case study.

<h4>Objective</h4> <p>In economic evaluation, a commonly used outcome measure for the treatment effect is the between-arm difference in restricted mean survival time (rmstD). This study illustrates how different survival analysis methods can be used to estimate the rmstD for econom...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lueza, B, Mauguen, A, Pignon, J, Rivero-Arias, O, Bonastre, J, MAR-LC Collaborative Group
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science 2016
_version_ 1797053093867683840
author Lueza, B
Mauguen, A
Pignon, J
Rivero-Arias, O
Bonastre, J
MAR-LC Collaborative Group
author_facet Lueza, B
Mauguen, A
Pignon, J
Rivero-Arias, O
Bonastre, J
MAR-LC Collaborative Group
author_sort Lueza, B
collection OXFORD
description <h4>Objective</h4> <p>In economic evaluation, a commonly used outcome measure for the treatment effect is the between-arm difference in restricted mean survival time (rmstD). This study illustrates how different survival analysis methods can be used to estimate the rmstD for economic evaluation using individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. Our aim was to study if/how the choice of a method impacts on cost-effectiveness results.</p> <h4>Methods</h4> <p>We used IPD from the Meta-Analysis of Radiotherapy in Lung Cancer concerning 2,000 patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, included in ten trials. We considered methods either used in the field of meta-analysis or in economic evaluation but never applied to assess the rmstD for economic evaluation using IPD meta-analysis. Methods were classified into two approaches. With the first approach, the rmstD is estimated directly as the area between the two pooled survival curves. With the second approach, the rmstD is based on the aggregation of the rmstDs estimated in each trial.</p> <h4>Results</h4> <p>The average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and acceptability curves were sensitive to the method used to estimate the rmstD. The estimated rmstDs ranged from 1.7 month to 2.5 months, and mean ICERs ranged from€24,299 to€34,934 per life-year gained depending on the chosen method. At a ceiling ratio of€25,000 per life year-gained, the probability of the experimental treatment being cost-effective ranged from 31% to 68%.</p> <h4>Conclusions</h4> <p>This case study suggests that the method chosen to estimate the rmstD from IPD metaanalysis is likely to influence the results of cost-effectiveness analyses.</p>
first_indexed 2024-03-06T18:39:14Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:0c539318-be69-4dba-969f-3499a92f952b
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-06T18:39:14Z
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:0c539318-be69-4dba-969f-3499a92f952b2022-03-26T09:34:17ZDifference in restricted mean survival time for cost-effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta-analysis: Evidence from a case study.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:0c539318-be69-4dba-969f-3499a92f952bEnglishSymplectic Elements at OxfordPublic Library of Science2016Lueza, BMauguen, APignon, JRivero-Arias, OBonastre, JMAR-LC Collaborative Group<h4>Objective</h4> <p>In economic evaluation, a commonly used outcome measure for the treatment effect is the between-arm difference in restricted mean survival time (rmstD). This study illustrates how different survival analysis methods can be used to estimate the rmstD for economic evaluation using individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. Our aim was to study if/how the choice of a method impacts on cost-effectiveness results.</p> <h4>Methods</h4> <p>We used IPD from the Meta-Analysis of Radiotherapy in Lung Cancer concerning 2,000 patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, included in ten trials. We considered methods either used in the field of meta-analysis or in economic evaluation but never applied to assess the rmstD for economic evaluation using IPD meta-analysis. Methods were classified into two approaches. With the first approach, the rmstD is estimated directly as the area between the two pooled survival curves. With the second approach, the rmstD is based on the aggregation of the rmstDs estimated in each trial.</p> <h4>Results</h4> <p>The average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and acceptability curves were sensitive to the method used to estimate the rmstD. The estimated rmstDs ranged from 1.7 month to 2.5 months, and mean ICERs ranged from€24,299 to€34,934 per life-year gained depending on the chosen method. At a ceiling ratio of€25,000 per life year-gained, the probability of the experimental treatment being cost-effective ranged from 31% to 68%.</p> <h4>Conclusions</h4> <p>This case study suggests that the method chosen to estimate the rmstD from IPD metaanalysis is likely to influence the results of cost-effectiveness analyses.</p>
spellingShingle Lueza, B
Mauguen, A
Pignon, J
Rivero-Arias, O
Bonastre, J
MAR-LC Collaborative Group
Difference in restricted mean survival time for cost-effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta-analysis: Evidence from a case study.
title Difference in restricted mean survival time for cost-effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta-analysis: Evidence from a case study.
title_full Difference in restricted mean survival time for cost-effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta-analysis: Evidence from a case study.
title_fullStr Difference in restricted mean survival time for cost-effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta-analysis: Evidence from a case study.
title_full_unstemmed Difference in restricted mean survival time for cost-effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta-analysis: Evidence from a case study.
title_short Difference in restricted mean survival time for cost-effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta-analysis: Evidence from a case study.
title_sort difference in restricted mean survival time for cost effectiveness analysis using individual patient data meta analysis evidence from a case study
work_keys_str_mv AT luezab differenceinrestrictedmeansurvivaltimeforcosteffectivenessanalysisusingindividualpatientdatametaanalysisevidencefromacasestudy
AT mauguena differenceinrestrictedmeansurvivaltimeforcosteffectivenessanalysisusingindividualpatientdatametaanalysisevidencefromacasestudy
AT pignonj differenceinrestrictedmeansurvivaltimeforcosteffectivenessanalysisusingindividualpatientdatametaanalysisevidencefromacasestudy
AT riveroariaso differenceinrestrictedmeansurvivaltimeforcosteffectivenessanalysisusingindividualpatientdatametaanalysisevidencefromacasestudy
AT bonastrej differenceinrestrictedmeansurvivaltimeforcosteffectivenessanalysisusingindividualpatientdatametaanalysisevidencefromacasestudy
AT marlccollaborativegroup differenceinrestrictedmeansurvivaltimeforcosteffectivenessanalysisusingindividualpatientdatametaanalysisevidencefromacasestudy