Quality of Life and Health State Utilities in Bladder Cancer

Angela B Smith; Sean McCabe; Allison M Deal; Amy Guo; Kathryn H Gessner; Robert Lipman; Stephanie Chisolm; Lauren Ahlschlager; John L Gore

doi:10.3233/BLC-211615

Quality of Life and Health State Utilities in Bladder Cancer

Bladder Cancer. 2022 Mar 11;8(1):55-70. doi: 10.3233/BLC-211615. eCollection 2022.

Authors

Angela B Smith^{1

2}, Sean McCabe², Allison M Deal², Amy Guo³, Kathryn H Gessner¹, Robert Lipman⁴, Stephanie Chisolm⁵, Lauren Ahlschlager¹, John L Gore⁶

Affiliations

¹ Department of Urology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
² Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
³ Fergene, Boston, MA, USA.
⁴ Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network, Research Patient Advocate, Bethesda, MD, USA.
⁵ Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network, Director of Education & Research, Bethesda, MD, USA.
⁶ University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Abstract

Background: Bladder cancer treatments may variably impact health-related quality of life (QOL).

Objective: To characterize the quality of life of patients with bladder cancer at various time points across the continuum of bladder cancer care from non-muscle-invasive disease to metastatic bladder cancer and develop utility scores to inform cost-effective analyses.

Methods: We performed a cross-sectional survey of bladder cancer patients in the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network Patient Survey Network. Participants were classified into mutually exclusive health states based upon non-muscle invasive (NMIBC), muscle-invasive (MIBC), or metastatic bladder cancer and completed surveys of generic cancer and bladder cancer-specific quality of life, financial toxicity, and work impairment. We constructed generalized linear mixed models to identify patient, clinical, and treatment factors associated with quality of life over time and derived health state utilities.

Results: Among 911 self-identified patients with bladder cancer, overall QOL scores and function domains were worse among those with advanced cancer. Financial toxicity was similar among non-metastatic disease states. Work and activity impairment increased with advancing disease (13%and 12%among non-recurrent NMIBC to 63%and 31%for metastatic disease respectively; p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, bowel-related QOL was diminished among patients with MIBC, with urinary symptoms and physical function most diminished among patients with metastatic disease. Patients with metastatic and MIBC experienced worse emotional functioning (p = 0.04; p = 0.048). Health state utilities were calculated, highest among those with non-recurrent NMIBC and lowest among those with metastatic disease.

Conclusion: Generic and bladder cancer-specific QOL diminishes with advancing disease. Health state utility estimates derived from this study can inform shared decision making with patients and may be used to inform future cost-effective analyses.

Keywords: Urinary bladder neoplasms; patient-reported outcomes; quality of life; utility.