Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mapping the disease-specific LupusQoL to the SF-6D

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To derive a mapping algorithm to predict SF-6D utility scores from the non-preference-based LupusQoL and test the performance of the developed algorithm on a separate independent validation data set.

Method

LupusQoL and SF-6D data were collected from 320 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) attending routine rheumatology outpatient appointments at seven centres in the UK. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression was used to estimate models of increasing complexity in order to predict individuals’ SF-6D utility scores from their responses to the LupusQoL questionnaire. Model performance was judged on predictive ability through the size and pattern of prediction errors generated. The performance of the selected model was externally validated on an independent data set containing 113 female SLE patients who had again completed both the LupusQoL and SF-36 questionnaires.

Results

Four of the eight LupusQoL domains (physical health, pain, emotional health, and fatigue) were selected as dependent variables in the final model. Overall model fit was good, with R2 0.7219, MAE 0.0557, and RMSE 0.0706 when applied to the estimation data set, and R2 0.7431, MAE 0.0528, and RMSE 0.0663 when applied to the validation sample.

Conclusion

This study provides a method by which health state utility values can be estimated from patient responses to the non-preference-based LupusQoL, generalisable beyond the data set upon which it was estimated. Despite concerns over the use of OLS to develop mapping algorithms, we find this method to be suitable in this case due to the normality of the SF-6D data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013 Foreword PMG9. (n.d.). Retrieved March 10, 2014, from http://publications.nice.org.uk/guide-to-the-methods-of-technology-appraisal-2013-pmg9

  2. Sullivan, S., Lyles, A., Luce, B., & Grigar, J. (n.d.). AMCP guidance for submission of clinical and economic evaluation data to support formulary listing in U.S. health plans and pharmacy benefits management organizations. Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy, 7(4), 272–282.

  3. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. (2006). Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies. Canada. http://www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/186_EconomicGuidelines_e.pdf

  4. Gold, M. R. (1996). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brazier, J. E., Yang, Y., Tsuchiya, A., & Rowen, D. L. (2010). A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. The European Journal of Health Economics, 11(2), 215–225. doi:10.1007/s10198-009-0168-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Longworth, L., & Rowen, D. (2013). Mapping to obtain EQ-5D utility values for use in NICE health technology assessments. Value in Health, 16(1), 202–210. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.10.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gray, A. M., Rivero-Arias, O., & Clarke, P. M. (2006). Estimating the association between SF-12 responses and EQ-5D utility values by response mapping. Medical Decision Making, 26(1), 18–29. doi:10.1177/0272989X05284108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McElhone, K., Abbott, J., Shelmerdine, J., Bruce, I. N., Ahmad, Y., Gordon, C., & Teh, L. S. (2007). Development and validation of a disease-specific health-related quality of life measure, the LupusQol, for adults with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 57(6), 972–979. doi:10.1002/art.22881.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. O’Neill, S., & Cervera, R. (2010). Systemic lupus erythematosus. Best Practice and Research Clinical Rheumatology, 24(6), 841–855. doi:10.1016/j.berh.2010.10.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Meacock, R., Dale, N., & Harrison, M. J. (2013). The humanistic and economic burden of systemic lupus erythematosus : A systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics, 31(1), 49–61. doi:10.1007/s40273-012-0007-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Petri, M. (2002). Epidemiology of systemic lupus erythematosus. Best Practice and Research Clinical Rheumatology, 16(5), 847–858.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McElhone, K., Abbott, J., & Teh, L. S. (2006). A review of health related quality of life in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus, 15(10), 633–643.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bruce, I. N. (2010). Re-evaluation of biologic therapies in systemic lupus erythematosus. Current Opinion in Rheumatology, 22(3), 273–277. doi:10.1097/BOR.0b013e3283374e78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Touma, Z., Gladman, D. D., Ibañez, D., & Urowitz, M. B. (2011). Is there an advantage over SF-36 with a quality of life measure that is specific to systemic lupus erythematosus? The Journal of Rheumatology, 38(9), 1898–1905. doi:10.3899/jrheum.110007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Clinical Trials - Corporate Translations. (n.d.). Retrieved February 7, 2014, from http://www.corptransinc.com/Sites/LupusQoL/Instrument-Information/Clinical-Trials.aspx

  16. Drummond, M. F., Wilson, D. A., Kanavos, P., Ubel, P., & Rovira, J. (2007). Assessing the economic challenges posed by orphan drugs. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 23(1), 36–42. doi:10.1017/S0266462307051550.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Brazier, J. E., & Roberts, J. (2004). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Medical Care, 42(9), 851–859.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Brazier, J., Usherwood, T., Harper, R., & Thomas, K. (1998). Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 health survey. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51(11), 1115–1128. doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00103-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Brazier, J. (1993). The SF-36 health survey questionnaire—A tool for economists. Health Economics, 2(3), 213–215. doi:10.1002/hec.4730020304.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ware, J. E., Snow, K. K., Kosinski, M., Gandek, B., & Institute NEMCHH. (1993). SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ware, J Jr, Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1996). A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care, 34(3), 220–233.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sanchez, M., McGwin, G., Duran, S., Fernandez, M., Reveille, J., Vila, L., & Alarcon, G. (2009). Factors predictive of overall health over the course of the disease in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus from the LUMINA cohort (LXII): Use of the SF-6D. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 27, 64–71.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Aggarwal, R., Wilke, C. T., Pickard, A. S., Vats, V., Mikolaitis, R., Fogg, L., & Jolly, M. (2009). Psychometric properties of the EuroQol-5D and short form-6D in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. The Journal of Rheumatology, 36(6), 1209–1216. doi:10.3899/jrheum.081022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Harrison, M. J., Ahmad, Y., Haque, S., Dale, N., Teh, L.-S., Snowden, N., & Bruce, I. N. (2012). Construct and criterion validity of the short form-6D utility measure in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. The Journal of Rheumatology, 39(4), 735–742. doi:10.3899/jrheum.110648.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tan, E. M., Cohen, A. S., Fries, J. F., Masi, A. T., McShane, D. J., Rothfield, N. F., & Winchester, R. J. (1982). The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 25(11), 1271–1277.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hochberg, M. C. (1997). Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 40(9), 1725. doi:10.1002/1529-0131(199709)40:9&1725:AID-ART29&3.0.CO;2-Y.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ahmad, Y., & Bruce, I. (2004). Sunclinical atherosclerosis in systemic lupus erythematosus. The Journal of Rheumatology, 31, 841–843.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hernández Alava, M., Wailoo, A. J., & Ara, R. (2012). Tails from the Peak District: Adjusted limited dependent variable mixture models of EQ-5D questionnaire health state utility values. Value in Health, 15(3), 550–561. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Pullenayegum, E. M., Tarride, J.-E., Xie, F., Goeree, R., Gerstein, H. C., & O’Reilly, D. (2010). Analysis of health utility data when some subjects attain the upper bound of 1: Are tobit and clad models appropriate? Value in Health, 13(4), 487–494. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00695.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Janssen, M. F., Pickard, A. S., Golicki, D., Gudex, C., Niewada, M., Scalone, L., & Busschbach, J. (2013). Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: A multi-country study. Quality of Life Research, 22(7), 1717–1727. doi:10.1007/s11136-012-0322-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Brazier, J., Connell, J., Papaioannou, D., Mukuria, C., Mulhern, B., Peasgood, T., Parry, G. (2014). A systematic review, psychometric analysis and qualitative assessment of generic preference-based measures of health in mental health populations and the estimation of mapping functions from widely used specific measures. Health Technology Assessment doi:10.3310/hta18340.

  33. Browne, C., Brazier, J., Carlton, J., Alavi, Y., & Jofre-Bonet, M. (2012). Estimating quality-adjusted life years from patient-reported visual functioning. Eye, 26(10), 1295–1301. doi:10.1038/eye.2012.137.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Yang, Y., Wong, M. Y., Lam, C. L. K., & Wong, C. K. H. (2014). Improving the mapping of condition-specific health-related quality of life onto SF-6D score. Quality of Life Research, 23(8), 2343–2353. doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0668-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. UK: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bansback, N., Marra, C., Tsuchiya, A., Anis, A., Guh, D., Hammond, T., & Brazier, J. (2007). Using the health assessment questionnaire to estimate preference-based single indices in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care & Research, 57(6), 963–971. doi:10.1002/art.22885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Harrison, M. J., Lunt, M., Verstappen, S. M., Watson, K. D., Bansback, N. J., & Symmons, D. P. (2010). Exploring the validity of estimating EQ-5D and SF-6D utility values from the health assessment questionnaire in patients with inflammatory arthritis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8(1), 21. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-8-21.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Gabriel, S., Drummond, M., Maetzel, A., Boers, M., Coyle, D., Welch, V., & Tugwell, P. (2003). OMERACT 6 Economics Working Group report: A proposal for a reference case for economic evaluation in rheumatoid arthritis. The Journal of Rheumatology, 30(4), 886–890.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Barton, G. R., Sach, T. H., Jenkinson, C., Avery, A. J., Doherty, M., & Muir, K. R. (2008). Do estimates of cost-utility based on the EQ-5D differ from those based on the mapping of utility scores? Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 6(1), 51. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-6-51.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Feeny, D., Spritzer, K., Hays, R. D., Liu, H., Ganiats, T. G., Kaplan, R. M., & Fryback, D. G. (2012). Agreement about identifying patients who change over time: Cautionary results in cataract and heart failure patients. Medical Decision Making, 32(2), 273–286. doi:10.1177/0272989X11418671.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Marra, C. A., Marion, S. A., Guh, D. P., Najafzadeh, M., Wolfe, F., Esdaile, J. M., & Anis, A. H. (2007). Not all quality-adjusted life years are equal. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(6), 616–624. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kirwan, J. R., Boonen, A., Harrison, M. J., Hewlett, S. E., Wells, G. A., Singh, J. A., & Dworkin, R. H. (2011). OMERACT 10 patient perspective virtual Campus: Valuing health; measuring outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis fatigue, RA sleep, arthroplasty, and systemic sclerosis; and clinical significance of changes in health. The Journal of Rheumatology, 38(8), 1728–1734. doi:10.3899/jrheum.110393.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Fayers, P. M., & Hays, R. D. (2014). Should linking replace regression when mapping from profile-based measures to preference-based measures? Value in Health, 17(2), 261–265. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2013.12.002.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Rowen, D., Brazier, J., & Roberts, J. (2009). Mapping SF-36 onto the EQ-5D index: How reliable is the relationship? Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 7(1), 27. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-7-27.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ara, R., & Brazier, J. (2008). Deriving an algorithm to convert the eight mean SF-36 dimension scores into a mean EQ-5D preference-based score from published studies (where patient level data are not available). Value in Health, 11(7), 1131–1143. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00352.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. McELHONE, K., Castelino, M., Abbott, J., Bruce, I. N., Ahmad, Y., Shelmerdine, J., & Teh, L. S. (2010). The LupusQoL and associations with demographics and clinical measurements in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. The Journal of Rheumatology, 37(11), 2273–2279. doi:10.3899/jrheum.091277.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Fayers, P. M., & Hays, R. D. (2014). Don’t middle your MIDs: Regression to the mean shrinks estimates of minimally important differences. Quality of Life Research, 23(1), 1–4. doi:10.1007/s11136-013-0443-4.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Manchester, 4.311 Jean McFarlane Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M15 4QE, UK

    Rachel Meacock, Mark Harrison & Ian Bruce

  2. Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Mark Harrison

  3. Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, St Paul’s Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Mark Harrison

  4. Royal Blackburn Hospital, Blackburn, UK

    Kathleen McElhone & Lee-Suan Teh

  5. University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK

    Janice Abbott

  6. University Hospital of South Manchester, Manchester, UK

    Sahena Haque

  7. Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK

    Ian Bruce

Authors
  1. Rachel Meacock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark Harrison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kathleen McElhone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Janice Abbott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sahena Haque
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ian Bruce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Lee-Suan Teh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rachel Meacock.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 4.

Table 4 Overview of the domains and items of the LupusQoL
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Meacock, R., Harrison, M., McElhone, K. et al. Mapping the disease-specific LupusQoL to the SF-6D. Qual Life Res 24, 1749–1758 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0892-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0892-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation