• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

胃癌健康状况的效用值:一项系统评价

Utility Values of Health Status in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review.

作者信息

Gonzalez Cristian, Espinoza Manuel, Libuy Matías, Crispi Francisca, Riquelme Arnoldo, Alarid-Escudero Fernando, Latorre Gonzalo, Pizarro Margarita, Cuadrado Cristóbal

机构信息

Escuela de Salud Pública, Universidad de Chile, Santiago de Chile, RM, Chile.

Departamento Salud Pública, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago de Chile, RM, Chile; Centro de Prevención y Control de Cáncer (CECAN), Santiago de Chile, RM, Chile.

出版信息

Value Health Reg Issues. 2025 Mar;46:101063. doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101063. Epub 2025 Feb 1.

DOI:10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101063
PMID:39892180
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12225718/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Gastric cancer (GC) imposes a significant burden of disease globally. Multiple treatments are available but are associated with high costs and potentially detrimental effects on quality of life. The utility values of health status are measures of patient preference over quality of life, which are increasingly used for health and economic decision-making. Currently, there is little systematized information on the utility values for different stages of GC. This systematic review synthesizes and meta-analyses the literature on GC utilities.

METHODS

A search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library for studies reporting utility values calculated using direct and indirect methods. Information from the selected studies was extracted and appraised, and meta-analyses of utility values based on GC health states were performed.

RESULTS

Twelve studies involving 4585 patients were included. Random-effects meta-analysis estimates showed a mean utility of 0.77 (95% CI 0.7-0.85) for stage I, 0.75 (95% CI 0.65-0.85) for stage II, 0.70 (95% CI 0.63-0.96) for stage III, and 0.64 (95% CI 0.56-0.32) for stage IV. All estimates showed considerable heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides an updated overview of the literature on utility values in GC and presents a discussion of the relevance of GC stages for its analysis. Decision-makers should consider patients' preferences in the proposal of policies and clinical decisions.

摘要

目的

胃癌在全球造成了重大的疾病负担。有多种治疗方法可供选择,但这些方法成本高昂,且可能对生活质量产生不利影响。健康状况的效用值是衡量患者对生活质量偏好的指标,越来越多地用于健康和经济决策。目前,关于不同阶段胃癌效用值的系统信息很少。本系统评价综合并荟萃分析了有关胃癌效用值的文献。

方法

在PubMed、Embase、MEDLINE和Cochrane图书馆中进行检索,以查找报告使用直接和间接方法计算的效用值的研究。提取并评估所选研究的信息,并基于胃癌健康状态对效用值进行荟萃分析。

结果

纳入了12项研究,涉及4585名患者。随机效应荟萃分析估计显示,I期的平均效用值为0.77(95%置信区间0.7 - 0.85),II期为0.75(95%置信区间0.65 - 0.85),III期为0.70(95%置信区间0.63 - 0.96),IV期为0.64(95%置信区间0.56 - 0.32)。所有估计值均显示出相当大的异质性。

结论

我们的研究提供了关于胃癌效用值文献的最新综述,并讨论了胃癌分期在其分析中的相关性。决策者在制定政策和临床决策时应考虑患者的偏好。

相似文献

1
Utility Values of Health Status in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review.胃癌健康状况的效用值:一项系统评价
Value Health Reg Issues. 2025 Mar;46:101063. doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101063. Epub 2025 Feb 1.
2
Falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits, harms, and patient values and preferences.社区居住的老年人跌倒预防干预措施:系统评价和荟萃分析的益处、危害以及患者的价值观和偏好。
Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 26;13(1):289. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02681-3.
3
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topotecan for ovarian cancer.拓扑替康治疗卵巢癌的临床有效性和成本效益的快速系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(28):1-110. doi: 10.3310/hta5280.
4
Cost-effectiveness of using prognostic information to select women with breast cancer for adjuvant systemic therapy.利用预后信息为乳腺癌患者选择辅助性全身治疗的成本效益
Health Technol Assess. 2006 Sep;10(34):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-204. doi: 10.3310/hta10340.
5
The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of carmustine implants and temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed high-grade glioma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.卡莫司汀植入剂与替莫唑胺治疗新诊断的高级别胶质瘤的有效性和成本效益:一项系统评价与经济学评估
Health Technol Assess. 2007 Nov;11(45):iii-iv, ix-221. doi: 10.3310/hta11450.
6
Systematic review of the impact of urinary tract infections on health-related quality of life.系统评价下尿路感染对健康相关生活质量的影响。
BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110(11 Pt C):E830-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11337.x. Epub 2012 Jul 20.
7
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.成人全身麻醉后预防术后恶心呕吐的药物:网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.
8
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.系统性药理学治疗慢性斑块状银屑病:网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
9
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.慢性斑块状银屑病的全身药理学治疗:一项网状Meta分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 9;1(1):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub3.
10
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.

引用本文的文献

1
Patients' Preferences for Gastric Cancer Treatment: A Cross-Sectional Study on Decision-Making in Multidisciplinary Treatment Strategies.胃癌治疗的患者偏好:多学科治疗策略决策的横断面研究
J Gastric Cancer. 2025 Jul;25(3):478-496. doi: 10.5230/jgc.2025.25.e35.

本文引用的文献

1
Quality appraisal for systematic literature reviews of health state utility values: a descriptive analysis.健康状态效用值的系统文献综述质量评价:描述性分析。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Nov 25;22(1):303. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01784-6.
2
Comparing EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in measuring the HRQoL burden of 4 health conditions in China.比较EQ-5D-3L和EQ-5D-5L在中国测量4种健康状况的健康相关生活质量负担方面的情况。
Eur J Health Econ. 2023 Mar;24(2):197-207. doi: 10.1007/s10198-022-01465-7. Epub 2022 May 10.
3
Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life Years for 29 Cancer Groups From 2010 to 2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.2010 年至 2019 年 29 种癌症的发病率、死亡率、生命损失年数、失能生存年数和伤残调整生命年:2019 年全球疾病负担研究的系统分析。
JAMA Oncol. 2022 Mar 1;8(3):420-444. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.6987.
4
Health related quality of life following open versus minimally invasive total gastrectomy for cancer: Results from a randomized clinical trial.癌症患者行开放性与微创全胃切除术的健康相关生活质量:一项随机临床试验的结果。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2022 Mar;48(3):553-560. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.08.031. Epub 2021 Aug 30.
5
Evaluating health-related quality of life in gastric cancer patients in Suzhou, China.评价中国苏州胃癌患者的健康相关生活质量。
Ann Palliat Med. 2021 Jul;10(7):8024-8033. doi: 10.21037/apm-21-1599.
6
Health state utility values by cancer stage: a systematic literature review.癌症分期的健康状态效用值:系统文献回顾。
Eur J Health Econ. 2021 Nov;22(8):1275-1288. doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01335-8. Epub 2021 Jun 14.
7
QOL assessment after palliative surgery for malignant bowel obstruction caused by peritoneal dissemination of gastric cancer: a prospective multicenter observational study.胃癌腹膜播散所致恶性肠梗阻姑息性手术后的生活质量评估:一项前瞻性多中心观察性研究。
Gastric Cancer. 2021 Sep;24(5):1131-1139. doi: 10.1007/s10120-021-01179-4. Epub 2021 Mar 31.
8
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.PRISMA 2020 声明:系统评价报告的更新指南。
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
9
A contrast of meta and metafor packages for meta-analyses in R.R语言中用于荟萃分析的meta和metafor包对比
Ecol Evol. 2020 Sep 14;10(20):10916-10921. doi: 10.1002/ece3.6747. eCollection 2020 Oct.
10
Health State Utility Values in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.精神分裂症患者的健康状态效用值:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Value Health. 2020 Sep;23(9):1256-1267. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.05.014. Epub 2020 Aug 1.