This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Xiaojian Zhang
Zhengzhou University First Affiliated Hospital
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5527-4453
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Backgroud: Evolving practice in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) therapy inevitably impacts health care budgets, especially the introduction of targeted therapies. This results in a rise of health economic evaluations (HEEs) in this domain. The objective of this article is to review the quality of the economic evidence of targeted therapies in metastatic NSCLC.
Methods: A literature search using Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase and CRD (University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination) database was conducted to identify original articles published between 1/1/2000 and 31/3/2019. A quality of reporting assessment using CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement) was translated into a quantitative score and compared with QHES (Quality of Health Economic Studies) evaluation.
Results: Twenty-one HEEs were analyzed. In CHEERS assessment, method description integrity (including setting, perspective, time horizon and discount rate), justification of data sources and heterogeneity description were often absent or incomplete. Only four studies reach the standard of good quality. Modeled articles were mainly evaluated by the QHES instrument, lack of illustrated structure, formula of the transitioning probability and justification for the choice of the model were the most frequent problems in selected studies. After quantification, the CHEERS-scores did not differ significantly from QHES-scores.
Conclusion: The overall quality of HEEs in NSCLC targeted therapies is not high. In addition, further efforts are needed to improve the standardization of the model application and the transparency of data description, which is indispensable for valid decision-making on scarce health care resource allocation.
Keywords
Health economic evaluation, NSCLC, Quality evaluation
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 1
Posted 19 Sep, 2019
No community comments so far
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Pulmonology
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Research article
Xiaojian Zhang
Zhengzhou University First Affiliated Hospital
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5527-4453
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 1
Posted 19 Sep, 2019
No community comments so far
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Pulmonology
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Backgroud: Evolving practice in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) therapy inevitably impacts health care budgets, especially the introduction of targeted therapies. This results in a rise of health economic evaluations (HEEs) in this domain. The objective of this article is to review the quality of the economic evidence of targeted therapies in metastatic NSCLC.
Methods: A literature search using Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase and CRD (University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination) database was conducted to identify original articles published between 1/1/2000 and 31/3/2019. A quality of reporting assessment using CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement) was translated into a quantitative score and compared with QHES (Quality of Health Economic Studies) evaluation.
Results: Twenty-one HEEs were analyzed. In CHEERS assessment, method description integrity (including setting, perspective, time horizon and discount rate), justification of data sources and heterogeneity description were often absent or incomplete. Only four studies reach the standard of good quality. Modeled articles were mainly evaluated by the QHES instrument, lack of illustrated structure, formula of the transitioning probability and justification for the choice of the model were the most frequent problems in selected studies. After quantification, the CHEERS-scores did not differ significantly from QHES-scores.
Conclusion: The overall quality of HEEs in NSCLC targeted therapies is not high. In addition, further efforts are needed to improve the standardization of the model application and the transparency of data description, which is indispensable for valid decision-making on scarce health care resource allocation.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...