Estimación del coste hospitalario del cáncer colorrectal en Cataluña

Subjective and objective financial toxicity among colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer type worldwide. Colorectal cancer treatment costs vary between countries as it depends on policy factors such as treatment algorithms, availability of treatments and whether the treatment is government-funded. Hence, the objective of this systematic review is to determine the prevalence and measurements of financial toxicity (FT), including the cost of treatment, among colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

Medline via PubMed platform, Science Direct, Scopus, and CINAHL databases were searched to find studies that examined CRC FT. There was no limit on the design or setting of the study.

RESULTS

Out of 819 papers identified through an online search, only 15 papers were included in this review. The majority (n = 12, 80%) were from high-income countries, and none from low-income countries. Few studies (n = 2) reported objective FT denoted by the prevalence of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE), 60% (9 out of 15) reported prevalence of subjective FT, which ranges from 7 to 80%, 40% (6 out of 15) included studies reported cost of CRC management- annual direct medical cost ranges from USD 2045 to 10,772 and indirect medical cost ranges from USD 551 to 795.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of consensus in defining and quantifying financial toxicity hindered the comparability of the results to yield the mean cost of managing CRC. Over and beyond that, information from some low-income countries is missing, limiting global representativeness.

Use of Drugs in Clinical Practice and the Associated Cost of Cancer Treatment in Adult Patients with Solid Tumors: A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Cancer is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the world. Its growing incidence and prevalence, as well as the advances in diagnostic and treatment tools, motivate an open debate about the economic burden it may place on health systems and have raised concerns about access to this technological innovation. There is a lack of information on the detailed costs of pharmacological treatment of cancer in our health setting. In this context, it is necessary to know the use of drugs in cancer treatment in conditions of real clinical practice. A real-word, evidence-based retrospective cohort study was conducted at Vall d'Hebron University Hospital (VHUH), the largest hospital complex in Catalonia, Spain, in order to determine the use of drugs and the associated cost in real clinical practice for the treatment of solid tumors in adult patients attended at this institution over 10 years (2010-2019).

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of adult cancer patients attended in clinical practice at the Medical Oncology Department of VHUH between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019. Data of prescription, preparation, and cost of antineoplastic treatments were analyzed by pharmacological class (cytotoxic drugs, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, radiopharmaceuticals, and others), by antineoplastic agent, and by type of tumor. The number of patients and the pharmaceutical expenditure corresponding to all these subgroups were recorded. The cost per patient in each tumor location was also calculated.

RESULTS

The study population included 13,209 patients with an overall pharmaceutical antineoplastic expenditure of EUR 120,396,097, increasing from 7.67% in relation to the total HUVH pharmaceutical expenditure in 2010 to 12.82% in 2019. By pharmacological class, the specific weight of the cost of targeted therapy is relevant (75.22% of pharmaceutical antineoplastic expenditure, 21.3% of patients) compared to the group of conventional cytotoxics (17.25% of pharmaceutical antineoplastic expenditure, 76.37% of patients), while immunotherapy has represented the largest relative increase, from 5% in 2014 to 12% in 2019. Eight targeted therapy drugs represented 50% of the costs of the targeted therapy drug class (palbociclib, trastuzumab, pertuzumab, bevacizumab, nivolumab, cetuximab, pembrolizumab, and trastuzumab emtansine). Eleven tumor sites accounted for 90% of the expenditure in 71% of all patients. Breast cancer had the highest expenditure during the study period (EUR 34,332,210) and at each individual year. Melanoma showed the highest increase, with 9.7% of total pharmaceutical antineoplastic expenditure in 2019 (2% of patients), representing a paradigm of the rising costs of cancer treatment due to the incorporation of new high-cost therapies. The average annual cost per patient was highly variable depending on the pathology. There was a growing increase in costs per patient in most tumor locations, particularly in patients with melanoma (from EUR 1922 in 2010 to EUR 37,020 in 2019), prostate cancer (from EUR 2992 in 2010 to EUR 14,118 in 2019), and non-small cell lung cancer (from EUR 3545 in 2010 to EUR 8371 in 2019). The relevance of the difference in monthly cost per patient that has been identified for the different intrinsic subtypes in breast cancer patients during 2019 (HER2+ EUR 2661/month, Luminal EUR 881/month, Triple negative EUR 386/month) makes us consider suggesting differentiated reimbursement rates for certain clinical conditions. Finally, support treatment with antiemetic drugs, erythropoietin stimulating agents, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), and bone resorption inhibitors has involved a cost of EUR 5,751,910, which represents 4.6% of the overall pharmacological cost of cancer treatment.

CONCLUSION

This study provides detailed insights on the oncological pharmaceutical expenditure for the treatment for solid tumors in the VHUH, based on real cost information from our hospital practice and for all antineoplastic therapies and types of solid tumors. This type of information on all the different types of cancer can be useful to better understand the economic burden of the disease and can be decisive for allocating public resources and funds for research, especially in those areas where information is scarce and therefore where further studies are needed. The contribution to knowledge of the cost of oncology therapy is of great value due to its realism and scope.

Lifetime direct healthcare costs of treating colorectal cancer: a systematic review

Colorectal cancer is a global public health issue and imposes a significant economic burden on populations and healthcare systems. This paper systematically reviews the literature to estimate the direct costs of colorectal cancer incurred during different phases of treatment (initial, continuing and end of life). MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of science, Evidence-based medicine reviews: National health service economic evaluation database guide, econlit and grey literature from the 1st of January 2000 to the 1st of February 2020. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Evers' Consensus on health economic criteria checklist. In total, 39,489 records were retrieved, and 17 studies were included. Costs by phase of treatment varied due to heterogeneity. However, studies that examined average costs for each phase of treatment showed a V-shaped distribution where the initial and end of life phases contribute the most and the continuing phase the least. The initial phase ranged from $7,893 to $60,289; the continuing annual phase ranged from $2,323 to $15,744; and the end of life phase ranged from $15,916 to $99,687. Studies that provided the total cost of each phase conversely showed that the continuing phase was the highest contributor to the cost of treating CRC. This study estimates the cost of the contemporary management of colorectal cancer despite the methodological heterogeneity. These costs place a heavy burden on healthcare providers, patients and their families. Identifying these costs can impact health care budgets and guide policymakers in making informed decisions for the future.

Cost of treating metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The cost of treating metastatic colorectal cancer places a significant economic burden on individuals, populations, and health care. However, there is a paucity of information on the costs of the contemporary management of metastatic colorectal cancer. This systematic review aims to review the literature to estimate the direct cost of treating metastatic colorectal cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews: National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database Guide, EconLit, and grey literature from the 1st of January 2000 to the 1st of February 2020 were all searched for studies reporting the direct costs of treating metastatic colorectal cancer. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Evers' Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist.

RESULTS

In total, 39,489 records were retrieved, and 29 studies were included. Costs of treating metastatic colorectal cancer varied because of the heterogeneity of treatment. Studies reported average costs ranged from $12,346 to $293,461. Studies that included the cost of systemic therapy reported an estimated cost of almost $300,000.

CONCLUSION

The existing evidence indicates that the cost of treating metastatic colorectal cancer places a significant economic burden on healthcare systems despite differences in methodology and treatment heterogeneity. Future research needs to define the cost components of treating metastatic colorectal cancer to improve comparability and examine the relationship between spending, overall survival, and quality of life. Identifying these costs and their impact on health care budgets can help policymakers plan health system expenditure.

Right and Left Colorectal Cancer: Differences in Post-Surgical-Care Outcomes and Survival in Elderly Patients

Simple Summary

The objective of this investigation is to analyze the differences between right and left colon cancer survival and test if these differences have transcendental importance for assistance to improve the survival and quality care of these patients. The results show that both entities are significantly different in terms of evolution, progression, complications and survival. Patients with right colon cancer have a worse prognosis, even in the early stages of the disease, due to more advanced N stages, a larger tumor size, more frequently poorly differentiated tumors and a greater positivity of lymphovascular invasion than left colon cancer. Improvement of the prognosis can be implemented mainly by reducing the specific mortality of colon cancer by achieving early detection and also stratified and personalized by location and age of onset, as well as surgical and oncological treatment of these patients.

Abstract

(1) There is evidence of the embryological, anatomical, histological, genetic and immunological differences between right colon cancer (RCC) and left colon cancer (LCC). This research has the general objective of studying the differences in outcome between RCC and LCC. (2) A longitudinal analytical study with prospective follow-up of the case–control type was conducted from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2017 including 398 patients with 1:1 matching, depending on the location of the tumor. Inclusion criteria: programmed colectomies, 15 cm above the anal margin, adults and R0 surgery. (3) Precisely 6.8% of the exitus occurred in the first 6 months of the intervention. At 6 months, patients with LCC presented a mean survival of 7 months higher than RCC (p = 0.028). In the first stages, it can be observed that most of the exitus are for patients with RCC (stage I p = 0.021, stage II p = 0.014). In the last stages, the distribution of the deaths does not show differences between locations (stage III p = 0.683, stage IV p = 0.898). (4) The results show that RCC and LCC are significantly different in terms of evolution, progression, complications and survival. Patients with RCC have a worse prognosis, even in the early stages of the disease, due to more advanced N stages, larger tumor size, more frequently poorly differentiated tumors and a greater positivity of lymphovascular invasion than LCC.

Health care costs of breast, prostate, colorectal and lung cancer care by clinical stage and cost component

OBJECTIVE

To measure 3-year care costs of breast, prostate, colorectal and lung cancers disaggregated by site and clinical stage.

METHOD

A retrospective observational design was employed to investigate care costs of cases recorded in the Registry of the Basque Country between 2010 and 2015. Data gathered included TNM stage and demographic, clinical and resource use variables. Total costs per patient with stage IV disease were calculated by combining generalized linear models with parametric survival analysis. Unit costs were obtained from the analytical accounting system of the Basque Health Service.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 23,782 cancer cases (7801 colorectal, 5530 breast, 4802 prostate and 5649 lung cancer). The mean 3-year costs per patient with stage I to III disease were €11,323, €13,727, €8,651 and €12,023 for colorectal, breast, prostate and lung cancer, respectively. The most important cost components were surgery and chemotherapy. Total survival-adjusted costs until death for patients with stage IV disease (€27,568, €26,296, €16,151 and €15,931 for breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer, respectively) were higher than the 3-year costs for those with earlier-stage disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This study quantitatively shows the pattern of changes in the economic burden of cancer throughout its natural history and the great magnitude of this burden for the health system. The use of indicators based on real-world data from each regional health service would allow cancer care in each region to be tailored to local population needs.

Value-Based Healthcare in Ostomies

In order to achieve significant improvements in quality, cost, and accessibility (the health “iron triangle”), innovation in organizational and service delivery models is necessary to increase the value of healthcare. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficiency of a model of organizational innovation based on advanced practice nurse in the care of people with ostomies (APN-O) versus usual care. An observational, exploratory, analytical, prospective study with a six-month follow-up was carried out at 12 hospitals that implemented this model in Andalusia. A total of 75 patients who had undergone a digestive elimination ostomy and/or a urinary ostomy were followed for six months. Clinical outcomes, healthcare resources, health-related quality of life, and willingness to pay (WTP) were analyzed. The economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective, including healthcare costs and indirect costs. The cost difference between the two models was €136.99 and the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was 0.05965 (€2297 per QALY gained). At six months, the mean of WTP was €69 per APN-O consultation. This model contributes to increasing the value-based healthcare in ostomies. Results of this study suggested that APN-O is an effective patient management model for improving their health status and is highly efficient.

Results after 10 years of colorectal cancer screenings in Spain: Hospital incidence and in-hospital mortality (2011-2016)

Background

Colorectal cancer incidence in Spain increased considerably between the early nineties and 2010. To reverse this tendency, screenings were progressively implemented starting the year 2001, targeting the population aged 50 to 69 years.

Objectives

This study aimed to update colorectal cancer incidence and mortality trends in Spain and provide a detailed analysis of disease management and risk factors involved in in-hospital mortality.

Methods

To this aim, anonymised primary and specialised care admission records from 2011 to 2016 were extracted from a Spanish claims database representative of all Spanish regions.

Results

Primary care files from 37,317 patients and specialised care files from 192,048 patients were obtained, in which males represented the 56.17% and 60.70% of patients respectively. In-hospital mortality rate was 10.07% and remained stable during the study period, similarly to colorectal cancer incidence within the hospitalised population, which was 106 per 10,000 patients. Patients deceased during the hospitalisation presented an increased presence of metastatic tumours. Mean length of hospital stay decreased significantly over the study period from 13.43 days to 11.67 days (p<0.001), similarly to patients’ 30-day readmission rate, which registered a decrease from the 15.29% to 13.58% (p<0.001). In consequence, the direct medical cost measured per patient, of €10,992, decreased over time. The implementation of colorectal cancer screening programmes caused a significant decrease in the number of new diagnoses in patients aged 75 to 79 years that may be attributable to the implementation of colorectal cancer screening programmes; however, in-hospital mortality was not reduced. Metastatic tumours and other conditions as anaemia are associated with higher in-hospital mortality rates.

Budget Impact Analysis of Molecular Lymph Node Staging Versus Conventional Histopathology Staging in Colorectal Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The presence of lymph node (LN) metastasis is a critical prognostic factor in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and is also an indicator for adjuvant chemotherapy. The gold standard (GS) technique for LN diagnosis and staging is based on the analysis of haematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained slides, but its sensitivity is low. As a result, patients may not be properly diagnosed and some may have local recurrence or distant metastases after curative-intent surgery. Many of these diagnostic and treatment problems could be avoided if the one-step nucleic acid amplification assay (OSNA) was used rather than the GS technique. OSNA is a fast, automated, standardised, highly sensitive, quantitative technique for detecting LN metastases.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the budget impact of introducing OSNA LN analysis in early-stage CRC patients in the Spanish National Health System (NHS).

METHODS

A budget impact analysis comparing two scenarios (GS vs. OSNA) was developed within the Spanish NHS framework over a 3-year time frame (2017-2019). The patient population consisted of newly diagnosed CRC patients undergoing surgical treatment, and the following costs were included: initial surgery, pathological diagnosis, staging, follow-up expenses, systemic treatment and surgery after recurrence. One- and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Using OSNA instead of the GS would have saved €1,509,182, €6,854,501 and €10,814,082 during the first, second and third years of the analysis, respectively, because patients incur additional costs in later years, leading to savings of more than €19 million for the NHS over the 3-year time horizon.

CONCLUSIONS

Introducing OSNA in CRC LN analysis may represent not only an economic benefit for the NHS but also a clinical benefit for CRC patients since a more accurate staging could be performed, thus avoiding unnecessary treatments.

Monitoring treatment response in metastasic colorectal cancer: Economic evaluation of PrediCTC versus computed tomography scan

Background: Late state colorectal cancer treatments have important side effects that should be avoided in patients where drug effectiveness is not adequate. PrediCTC is a new biomarkers blood test developed to determinate the chemotherapy response in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients that could allow to obviate unnecessary treatments. Aim: To assess from the Spanish Societal Perspective the cost-utility of the test PrediCTC compared to the computed tomography in aim to evaluate chemotherapy treatment response in late stage colorectal cancer patients. Methods: Based on the results of Barbazán et al., a Markov model has been developed, in which the different lines and cycles that the colorectal patient can receive and how they can move between them according to the computed tomography or PrediCTC have been represented. The effectiveness has been expressed in quality adjusted life years (QALYs), avoiding adverse events. Results: Base case analysis shows savings in different types of costs for PrediCTC (per patient): €14.30 in those arise from adverse events, €22,345.73 in chemotherapy costs, €4849.61 in other direct costs, and €306.21 in indirect costs. Although computed tomography 12-week assessed patients gain 0.17 QALYs compared with PrediCTC. Conclusions: From the Spanish Societal Perspective, PrediCTC is not a cost-utility option but allows to identify earlier patients who are not benefiting from first-line chemotherapy avoiding unnecessary side effects and costs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis in the Spanish setting of the PEAK trial of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab in combination with mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin) vs bevacizumab in combination with mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Spain.

METHODS

A semi-Markov model was developed including the following health states: Progression free; Progressive disease: Treat with best supportive care; Progressive disease: Treat with subsequent active therapy; Attempted resection of metastases; Disease free after metastases resection; Progressive disease: after resection and relapse; and Death. Parametric survival analyses of patient-level progression free survival and overall survival data from the PEAK Phase II clinical trial were used to estimate health state transitions. Additional data from the PEAK trial were considered for the dose and duration of therapy, the use of subsequent therapy, the occurrence of adverse events, and the incidence and probability of time to metastasis resection. Utility weightings were calculated from patient-level data from panitumumab trials evaluating first-, second-, and third-line treatments. The study was performed from the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective including only direct costs. A life-time horizon was applied. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

Based on the PEAK trial, which demonstrated greater efficacy of panitumumab vs bevacizumab, both in combination with mFOLFOX6 first-line in wild-type RAS mCRC patients, the estimated incremental cost per life-year gained was €16,567 and the estimated incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained was €22,794. The sensitivity analyses showed the model was robust to alternative parameters and assumptions.

LIMITATIONS

The analysis was based on a simulation model and, therefore, the results should be interpreted cautiously.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the PEAK Phase II clinical trial and taking into account Spanish costs, the results of the analysis showed that first-line treatment of mCRC with panitumumab + mFOLFOX6 could be considered a cost-effective option compared with bevacizumab + mFOLFOX6 for the Spanish NHS.

Direct medical cost associated with colorectal cancer in north of Jordan

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is mainly characterized as the malignant and impaired growth of rectal cells in the intestinal region. Direct medical cost is related to resources, which are directly used in treating the patient, that mainly includes the cost of drugs, diagnostic, treatment, follow-up, rehabilitation, and hospital admission. The objective of this study is to estimate and analyze direct medical costs attributable to CRC in Jordan. A retrospective analysis of a cohort patients treated for CRC data has been performed to determine direct medical costs attributable to CRC in Jordan. The prevalence-based approach has been used in addition to the "bottom up" approach to accumulate 1-year time costs of CRC. Demographic, clinical, and economic data have been collected and analyzed using SPSS for windows. Costs were estimated by a bottom-up approach, in which each service component was identified and valued at the most detailed level, to provide greater transparency and reliability in economic evaluation of health care services. This study quantified the economic burden associated with CRC by Jordanian patients in King Abdullah University Hospital from the perspective of health care providers (public sector). Total CRC cost in the year 2014 was estimated to JD 695,608, and the most expensive stage for all sites was stage 4 reaching a cost of JD 5147. Advanced disease stages were associated with an increase in total cost and chemotherapy costs. In conclusion, results of this study propose that direct medical costs associated with CRC are considerable. Most of the cost was devoted for medications, primarily chemotherapy. Advanced stages were associated with higher cost and largest number of patients.