Partial-breast irradiation versus whole-breast irradiation for early-stage breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Early and Intermediate Treatment Outcome After Postoperative External Beam Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation in Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

To prospectively evaluate early and intermediate outcome after accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) in patients early-with stage breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Inclusion criteria were defined according to the APBI American Society for Radiation Oncology's ASTRO Evidence-Based Consensus Statement. The prescribed dose was 26 to 28 Gy in 5 fractions on 5 consecutive days. Regular follow-up visits with objective and subjective evaluation of treatment tolerance were performed after 0 and 2 weeks, 6 months, and at annual intervals.

RESULTS

Between February 2017 and January 2020, 175 patients with breast conserving surgery met the inclusion criteria for APBI. Mean age was 65.7 years (range, 46-88). Thirteen percent of patients received a diagnosis with carcinoma in situ, 55%, 35%, and 37% with T1a/b/c, and 10% with T2 stages, respectively. The mean volume of planning target volume (PTV) was 119 cc (range, 45-465), the ratio of mean PTV: whole breast volume ratio was 21% (7%-53%). Mean follow-up was 42 months (median, 45, range, 0-67). Acute toxicity after 2 weeks was low with 69%, 26%, and 5% grade 0, 1, and 2. In addition, 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year follow-up data were available from 146, 134, 107, 73, and 25 patients. Patient-reported cosmetic outcomes were assessed excellent or good in 97.9%, 98.5%, 98.1%, 98.6%, and 100%. Regarding grade 2 toxicities, as by now 3%, 2%, 2%, 0%, and 0% G2 fibrosis, 1%, 1%, 0%, 0%, and 0% G2 atrophy, no G2 skin telangiectasia or breast edema occurred. So far, none of the patients have experienced G3 toxicity or higher. The remaining patients had grade 0 or 1 toxicity only. Five ipsilateral breast recurrences (1 marginally to PTV, 4 out-of-field) and 5 distant recurrences were recorded by March 2023. The 4-year in-breast recurrence rate was 2.5%. Eight patients died, with 2 of them from disease. For all patients, the 4-year overall, cancer specific and disease-free survival rates were 97.1%, 99.4%, and 95.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We showed high early- and intermediate-term treatment tolerance and disease control of APBI using 26 to 28 Gy in five fractions in one week in carefully selected patients with early breast cancer. APBI is highly appreciated by patients and efficient, as an additional advantage for busy centers.

Special issue. De-escalation of loco-regional treatment in breast cancer: Time to find the balance? Partial breast irradiation

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. Over the past few decades, remarkable progress has been made in understanding the biology and pathology of breast cancer. A personalized conservative approach has been currently adopted addressing the patient's individual risk of relapse. After postoperative whole breast irradiation for early-stage breast cancer, a rate of recurrences outside the initial tumour bed lower than 4% was observed. Thus, the highest benefits of breast irradiation seem to result from the dose delivered to the tissue neighbouring the tumour bed. Nonetheless, reducing treatment morbidity while maintaining radiation therapy's ability to decrease local recurrences is an important challenge in treating patients with radiation therapy. In this regard, strategies such as partial-breast irradiation have been developed to reduce toxicity without compromising oncologic outcomes. According to the national and international published guidelines, clinical oncologists can refer to specific dose/fractionation schedules and eligible criteria. However, there are still some areas of open questions. Breast cancer represents a multidisciplinary paradigm; it should be considered a heterogeneous disease where a "one-treatment-fits-all" approach cannot be considered an appropriate option. This is a wide overview on the main partial breast irradiation advantages, risks, timings, techniques, and available recommendations. We aim to provide practical findings to support clinical decision-making, exploring future perspectives, towards a balance for optimisation of breast cancer.

Cost-effectiveness of 5 fraction and partial breast radiotherapy for early breast cancer in the UK: model-based multi-trial analysis

PURPOSE

We estimated the cost-effectiveness of 4 radiotherapy modalities to treat early breast cancer in the UK. In a subgroup of patients eligible for all modalities, we compared whole-breast (WB) and partial breast (PB) radiotherapy delivered in either 15 (WB15F, PB15F) or 5 fractions (WB5F, PB5F). In a subgroup ineligible for PB radiotherapy, we compared WB15F to WB5F.

METHODS

We developed a Markov cohort model to simulate lifetime healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each modality. This was informed by the clinical analysis of two non-inferiority trials (FAST Forward and IMPORT LOW) and supplemented with external literature. The primary analysis assumed that radiotherapy modality influences health only through its impact on locoregional recurrence and radiotherapy-related adverse events.

RESULTS

In the primary analysis, PB5F had the least cost and greatest expected QALYs. WB5F had the least cost and the greatest expected QALYs in those only eligible for WB radiotherapy. Applying a cost-effectiveness threshold of £15,000/QALY, there was a 62% chance that PB5F was the cost-effective alternative in the PB eligible group, and there was a 100% chance that WB5F was cost-effective in the subgroup ineligible for PB radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionation to 5 fractions and partial breast radiotherapy modalities offer potentially important benefits to the UK health system.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of radiotherapy techniques for whole breast irradiation

Background

The current standard of care (SOC) for whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) in the US is conventional tangential photon fields. Advanced WBRT techniques may provide similar tumor control and better normal tissue sparing, but it is controversial whether the medical benefits of an advanced technology are significant enough to justify its higher cost.

Objective

To analyze the cost-effectiveness of six advanced WBRT techniques compared with SOC.

Methods

We developed a Markov model to simulate health states for one cohort of women (65-year-old) with early-stage breast cancer over 15 years after WBRT. The cost effectiveness analyses of field-in-field (FIF), hybrid intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), full IMRT, standard volumetric modulated arc therapy (STD-VMAT), multiple arc VMAT (MA-VMAT), non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) compared with SOC were performed with both tumor control and radiogenic side effects considered. Transition probabilities and utilities for each health state were obtained from literature. Costs incurred by payers were adopted from literature and Medicare data. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to evaluate the impact of uncertainties on the final results.

Results

FIF has the lowest ICER value of 1,511 $/QALY. The one-way analyses show that the cost-effectiveness of advanced WBRT techniques is most sensitive to the probability of developing contralateral breast cancer. PSAs show that SOC is more cost effective than almost all advanced WBRT techniques at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 50,000 $/QALY, while FIF, hybrid IMRT and MA-VMAT are more cost-effective than SOC with a probability of 59.2%, 72.3% and 72.6% at a WTP threshold of 100,000 $/QALY, respectively.

Conclusions

FIF might be the most cost-effective option for WBRT patients at a WTP threshold of 50,000 $/QALY, while hybrid IMRT and MA-VMAT might be the most cost-effective options at a WTP threshold of 100,000 $/QALY.

Proton Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: Clinical Outcomes at a Planned Interim Analysis of a Prospective Phase 2 Trial

PURPOSE

To perform a planned interim analysis of acute (within 12 months) and late (after 12 months) toxicities and cosmetic outcomes after proton accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 100 patients with pTis or pT1-2 N0 (≤3cm) breast cancer status after segmental mastectomy were enrolled in a single-arm phase 2 study from 2010 to 2019. The clinically determined postlumpectomy target volume, including tumor bed surgical clips and operative-cavity soft-tissue changes seen on imaging plus a radial clinical expansion, was irradiated with passively scattered proton APBI (34 Gy in 10 fractions delivered twice daily with a minimum 6-hour interfraction interval). Patients were evaluated at protocol-specific time intervals for recurrence, physician reports of cosmetic outcomes and toxicities, and patient reports of cosmetic outcomes and satisfaction with the treatment or experience.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 24 months (interquartile range [IQR], 12-43 months). Local control and overall survival were 100% at 12 and 24 months. There were no acute or late toxicities of grade 3 or higher; no patients experienced fat necrosis, fibrosis, infection, or breast shrinkage. Excellent or good cosmesis at 12 months was reported by 91% of patients and 94% of physicians; at the most recent follow-up, these were 94% and 87%, respectively. The most commonly reported late cosmetic effect was telangiectasis (17%). The total patient satisfaction rate for treatment and results at 12 and 24 months was 96% and 100%, respectively. Patients' mean time away from work was 5 days (IQR, 2-5 days), and the median out-of-pocket cost was $700 (IQR, $100-$1600). The mean left-sided heart dose was 2 cGy (range, 0.2-75 cGy), and the mean ipsilateral lung dose was 19 cGy (range, 0.2-164 cGy).

CONCLUSIONS

Proton APBI is a maturing treatment option with high local control, favorable intermediate-term cosmesis, high treatment satisfaction, low treatment burden, and exceptional heart and lung sparing.

Partial versus whole breast irradiation: Side effects, patient satisfaction and costs

PURPOSE

Since accelerated partial breast irradiation has demonstrated non-inferiority to whole breast irradiation regarding recurrence rate in patients with early stage breast cancer, our objective was to compare its impact on short-term adverse events, patient satisfaction and costs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with early stage breast cancer treated by breast-conserving surgery between 2007 and 2012 were included: 48 women who received three-dimensional conformal accelerated partial breast irradiation in a multicentre phase-II trial were paired with 48 patients prospectively treated with whole breast irradiation. Adverse events, and patients' opinions concerning cosmesis, satisfaction and pain, were gathered 1 month after treatment. Direct and indirect costs were collected from the French National Health Insurance System perspective until the end of radiotherapy.

RESULTS

When comparing its impact, skin reactions occurred in 37% of patients receiving three-dimensional conformal accelerated partial breast radiotherapy and 60% of patients receiving whole breast irradiation (P=0.07); 98% were very satisfied in the group three-dimensional conformal accelerated partial breast radiotherapy versus 46% in the group treated with whole breast irradiation (P<0.001); direct costs were significantly lower in the group treated with partial breast irradiation (mean cost: 2510€ versus 5479€/patient), due to less radiation sessions.

CONCLUSION

In patients with early-stage breast cancer, partial irradiation offered a good alternative to whole breast irradiation, as it was less expensive and satisfactory. These, and the clinical safety and tolerance results, need to be confirmed by long-term accelerated partial breast irradiation results in on-going phase III trials.

Accelerated partial breast radiotherapy: a review of the literature and future directions

Breast conservation therapy exemplifies the tailoring of medicine in the care of patients with cancer. Akin to improvements in surgical approaches, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) tailors the treatment volume and duration to the needs of well selected patients. Here, we examine the evidence supporting APBI as well as the lessons in patient selection, dose and delivery techniques. Examination of historical techniques and their associated outcomes will support more correct patient selection and treatment delivery in an era where we await the reports of several large prospective trials.

Prospective Comparison of Toxicity and Cosmetic Outcome After Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation With Conformal External Beam Radiotherapy or Single-Entry Multilumen Intracavitary Brachytherapy

PURPOSE

This study aimed to prospectively characterize toxicity and cosmesis after accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (CRT) or single-entry, multilumen, intracavitary brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 281 patients with pTis, pT1N0, or pT2N0 (≤3.0 cm) breast cancer treated with segmental mastectomy were prospectively enrolled from December 2008 through August 2014. APBI was delivered using 3-dimensional CRT (n = 29) or with SAVI (n = 176), Contura (n = 56), or MammoSite (n = 20) brachytherapy catheters. Patients were evaluated at protocol-specified intervals, at which time the radiation oncologist scored cosmetic outcome, toxicities, and recurrence status using a standardized template.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time is 41 months. Grade 1 seroma and fibrosis were more common with brachytherapy than with 3-dimensional CRT (50.4% vs 3.4% for seroma; P < .0001 and 66.3% vs 44.8% for fibrosis; P = .02), but grade 1 edema was more common with 3-dimensional CRT than with brachytherapy (17.2% vs 5.6%; P = .04). Grade 2 to 3 pain was more common with 3-dimensional CRT (17.2% vs 5.2%; P = .03). Actuarial 5-year rates of fair or poor radiation oncologist-reported cosmetic outcome were 9% for 3-dimensional CRT and 24% for brachytherapy (P = .13). Brachytherapy was significantly associated with inferior cosmesis on mixed model analysis (P = .003). Significant predictors of reduced risk of adverse cosmetic outcome after brachytherapy were D0.1cc (skin) ≤102%, minimum skin distance >5.1 mm, dose homogeneity index >0.54, and volume of nonconformance ≤0.89 cc. The 5-year ipsilateral breast recurrence was 4.3% for brachytherapy and 4.2% for 3-dimensional CRT APBI patients (P = .95).

CONCLUSIONS

Brachytherapy APBI is associated with higher rates of grade 1 fibrosis and seroma than 3-dimensional CRT but lower rates of grade 1 edema and grade 2 to 3 pain than 3-dimensional CRT. Rates of radiation oncologist-reported fair or poor cosmetic outcomes are higher with brachytherapy. We identified dosimetric parameters that predict reduced risk of adverse cosmetic outcome after brachytherapy-based APBI. Ipsilateral breast recurrence was equivalent for brachytherapy and 3-dimensional CRT.

Adjuvant breast radiotherapy: How to trade-off cost and effectiveness?

INTRODUCTION

A series of health economic evaluations (HEE) has analysed the efficiency of new fractionation schedules and techniques for adjuvant breast radiotherapy. This overview assembles the available evidence and evaluates to what extent HEE-results can be compared.

METHODS

Based on a systematic literature review of HEEs from 1/1/2000 to 30/10/2016, all cost comparison (CC) and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) comparing different adjuvant breast radiotherapy approaches were analysed. Costs were extracted and converted to Euro 2016 and costs per QALY were summarized in cost-effectiveness planes.

RESULTS

Twenty-four publications are withheld, comparing different fractionation schedules and/or irradiation techniques or evaluating the value of adding radiotherapy. Normofractionation and intensity-modulated, interstitial or intraluminal techniques are important cost-drivers. Highest reimbursements are observed in the US, but may overestimate the real cost. Hypofractionation is cost-effective compared to normofractionation, the results of partial breast irradiation are less unequivocal. Intra-operative and external beam approaches seem the most cost-effective for favourable risk groups, but whole breast irradiation is superior in terms of health effect and omission of radiotherapy in terms of costs.

CONCLUSION

Hypofractionation may be considered the most relevant comparator for new strategies in adjuvant breast radiotherapy, with omission of radiotherapy as an interesting alternative in the very favourable subcategories, especially for partial breast techniques. Although comparison of CC and CEA is hampered by the variability in clinical and economic settings, HEE-based evidence can guide decision-making to tailor-made strategies, allocating the optimal treatment in terms of effectiveness as well as efficiency to the right indication.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis Comparing Conventional, Hypofractionated, and Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Background

Early-stage breast cancer is among the most prevalent and costly malignancies treated in the American health care system. Adjuvant radiotherapy after lumpectomy represents a substantial portion of breast cancer expenditures. The relative value of novel radiotherapeutic approaches such as intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HF-WBI) compared with conventionally fractionated whole breast irradiation (CF-WBI) is unknown. Therefore, we used prospectively collected outcomes from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to compare the cost-effectiveness of these approaches.

Methods

We constructed a decision-analytic model that followed women who were treated with lumpectomy for early-stage breast cancer. Recurrence, mortality, complication rates, and utilities (five-year radiation-associated quality of life scores), were extracted from RCTs. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates. Cost-effectiveness from societal and health care sector perspectives was estimated considering two scenarios-the first assumes that radiation-associated disutility persists five years after treatment, and the second assumes that disutility discontinues. Lifetime outcomes were summarized using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses evaluated the robustness of the results.

Results

HF-WBI dominated CF-WBI (ie, resulted in higher quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] and lower cost) in all scenarios. HF-WBI also had a greater likelihood of cost-effectiveness compared with IORT; under a societal perspective that assumes that radiation-associated disutility persists, HF-WBI results in an ICER of $17 024 per QALY compared with IORT with a probability of cost-effectiveness of 80% at the $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. If radiation-associated disutility is assumed to discontinue, the ICER is lower ($11 461/QALY), resulting in an even higher (83%) probability of relative cost-effectiveness. The ICER was most sensitive to the probability of metastasis and treatment cost.

Conclusions

For women with early-stage breast cancer requiring adjuvant radiotherapy, HF-WBI is cost-effective compared with CF-WBI and IORT.

A systematic review of health economic evaluation in adjuvant breast radiotherapy: Quality counted by numbers

BACKGROUND

Evolving practice in adjuvant breast radiotherapy inevitably impacts healthcare budgets. This is reflected in a rise of health economic evaluations (HEE) in this domain. The available HEE literature was analysed qualitatively and quantitatively, using available instruments.

METHODS

HEEs published between 1/1/2000 and 31/10/2016 were retrieved through a systematic search in Medline, Cochrane and Embase. A quality-assessment using CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards) was translated into a quantitative score and compared with Tufts Medical Centre CEA registry and Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) results.

RESULTS

Twenty cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) and thirteen cost comparisons (CC) were analysed. In qualitative evaluation, valuation or justification of data sources, population heterogeneity and discussion on generalizability, in addition to declaration on funding, were often absent or incomplete. After quantification, the average CHEERS-scores were 74% (CI 66.9-81.1%) and 75.6% (CI 70.7-80.5%) for CEAs and CCs respectively. CEA-scores did not differ significantly from Tufts and QHES-scores.

CONCLUSION

Quantitative CHEERS evaluation is feasible and yields comparable results to validated instruments. HEE in adjuvant breast radiotherapy is of acceptable quality, however, further efforts are needed to improve comprehensive reporting of all data, indispensable for assessing relevance, reliability and generalizability of results.

Effects of online cone-beam computed tomography with active breath control in determining planning target volume during accelerated partial breast irradiation

PURPOSE

To test if active breath control during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) could improve planning target volume during accelerated partial breast radiotherapy for breast cancer.

METHODS

Patients who were more than 40 years old, underwent breast-conserving dissection and planned for accelerated partial breast irradiation, and with postoperative staging limited to T1-2 N0 M0, or postoperative staging T2 lesion no larger than 3cm with a negative surgical margin greater than 2mm were enrolled. Patients with lobular carcinoma or extensive ductal carcinoma in situ were excluded. CBCT images were obtained pre-correction, post-correction and post-treatment. Set-up errors were recorded at left-right, anterior-posterior and superior-inferior directions. The differences between these CBCT images, as well as calculated radiation doses, were compared between patients with active breath control or free breathing.

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled, among them 25 had active breath control. A total of 836 CBCT images were obtained for analysis. CBCT significantly reduced planning target volume. However, active breath control did not show significant benefit in decreasing planning target volume margin and the doses of organ-at-risk when compared to free breathing.

CONCLUSION

CBCT, but not active breath control, could reduce planning target volume during accelerated partial breast irradiation.

Unremarked or Unperformed? Systematic Review on Reporting of Validation Efforts of Health Economic Decision Models in Seasonal Influenza and Early Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Transparent reporting of validation efforts of health economic models give stakeholders better insight into the credibility of model outcomes. In this study we reviewed recently published studies on seasonal influenza and early breast cancer in order to gain insight into the reporting of model validation efforts in the overall health economic literature.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in Pubmed and Embase to retrieve health economic modelling studies published between 2008 and 2014. Reporting on model validation was evaluated by checking for the word validation, and by using AdViSHE (Assessment of the Validation Status of Health Economic decision models), a tool containing a structured list of relevant items for validation. Additionally, we contacted corresponding authors to ask whether more validation efforts were performed other than those reported in the manuscripts.

RESULTS

A total of 53 studies on seasonal influenza and 41 studies on early breast cancer were included in our review. The word validation was used in 16 studies (30 %) on seasonal influenza and 23 studies (56 %) on early breast cancer; however, in a minority of studies, this referred to a model validation technique. Fifty-seven percent of seasonal influenza studies and 71 % of early breast cancer studies reported one or more validation techniques. Cross-validation of study outcomes was found most often. A limited number of studies reported on model validation efforts, although good examples were identified. Author comments indicated that more validation techniques were performed than those reported in the manuscripts.

CONCLUSIONS

Although validation is deemed important by many researchers, this is not reflected in the reporting habits of health economic modelling studies. Systematic reporting of validation efforts would be desirable to further enhance decision makers' confidence in health economic models and their outcomes.

The INTRABEAM® Photon Radiotherapy System for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Initial treatment for early breast cancer is usually either breast-conserving surgery (BCS) or mastectomy. After BCS, whole-breast external beam radiotherapy (WB-EBRT) is the standard of care. A potential alternative to post-operative WB-EBRT is intraoperative radiation therapy delivered by the INTRABEAM(®) Photon Radiotherapy System (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany) to the tissue adjacent to the resection cavity at the time of surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of INTRABEAM for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer during surgical removal of the tumour.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library, were searched from inception to March 2014 for English-language articles. Bibliographies of articles, systematic reviews, clinical guidelines and the manufacturer's submission were also searched. The advisory group was contacted to identify additional evidence.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness were conducted. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts for eligibility. Inclusion criteria were applied to full texts of retrieved papers by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer, and differences in opinion were resolved through discussion at each stage. Clinical effectiveness studies were included if they were carried out in patients with early operable breast cancer. The intervention was the INTRABEAM system, which was compared with WB-EBRT, and study designs were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Controlled clinical trials could be considered if data from available RCTs were incomplete (e.g. absence of data on outcomes of interest). A cost-utility decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of INTRABEAM compared with WB-EBRT for early operable breast cancer.

RESULTS

One non-inferiority RCT, TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy Alone (TARGIT-A), met the inclusion criteria for the review. The review found that local recurrence was slightly higher following INTRABEAM than WB-EBRT, but the difference did not exceed the 2.5% non-inferiority margin providing INTRABEAM was given at the same time as BCS. Overall survival was similar with both treatments. Statistically significant differences in complications were found for the occurrence of wound seroma requiring more than three aspirations (more frequent in the INTRABEAM group) and for a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity score of grade 3 or 4 (less frequent in the INTRABEAM group). Cost-effectiveness base-case analysis indicates that INTRABEAM is less expensive but also less effective than WB-EBRT because it is associated with lower total costs but fewer total quality-adjusted life-years gained. However, sensitivity analyses identified four model parameters that can cause a switch in the treatment option that is considered cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

The base-case result from the model is subject to uncertainty because the disease progression parameters are largely drawn from the single available RCT. The RCT median follow-up of 2 years 5 months may be inadequate, particularly as the number of participants with local recurrence is low. The model is particularly sensitive to this parameter.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

A significant investment in INTRABEAM equipment and staff training (clinical and non-clinical) would be required to make this technology available across the NHS. Longer-term follow-up data from the TARGIT-A trial and analysis of registry data are required as results are currently based on a small number of events and economic modelling results are uncertain.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013006720.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. Note that the economic model associated with this document is protected by intellectual property rights, which are owned by the University of Southampton. Anyone wishing to modify, adapt, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, dismantle or create derivative work based on the economic model must first seek the agreement of the property owners.

Subgroup Economic Evaluation of Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer After Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

A recent meta-analysis by the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group found significant improvements achieved by postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) for patients with breast cancer with 1 to 3 positive nodes (pN1-3). It is unclear whether PMRT is cost-effective for subgroups of patients with positive nodes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of PMRT for subgroups of patients with breast cancer with positive nodes.

METHODS

A semi-Markov model was constructed to estimate the expected lifetime costs, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life-years for patients receiving or not receiving radiation therapy. Clinical and health utilities data were from meta-analyses by the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group or randomized clinical trials. Costs were estimated from the perspective of the Chinese society. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

FINDINGS

The incremental cost-effective ratio was estimated as $7984, $4043, $3572, and $19,021 per quality-adjusted life-year for patients with positive nodes (pN+), patients with pN1-3, patients with pN1-3 who received systemic therapy, and patients with >4 positive nodes (pN4+), respectively. According to World Health Organization recommendations, these incremental cost-effective ratios were judged as cost-effective. However, the results of one-way sensitivity analyses suggested that the results were highly sensitive to the relative effectiveness of PMRT (rate ratio).

IMPLICATIONS

We determined that the results were highly sensitive to the rate ratio. However, the addition of PMRT for patients with pN1-3 in China has a reasonable chance to be cost-effective and may be judged as an efficient deployment of limited health resource, and the risk and uncertainty of PMRT are relatively greater for patients with pN4+.

Utilization and Outcomes of Breast Brachytherapy in Younger Women

PURPOSE

To directly compare (1) radiation treatment utilization patterns; (2) risks of subsequent mastectomy; and (3) costs of radiation treatment in patients treated with brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation (WBI), in a national, contemporary cohort of women with incident breast cancer, aged 64 years and younger.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using MarketScan health care claims data, we identified 45,884 invasive breast cancer patients (aged 18-64 years), treated from 2003 to 2010 with lumpectomy, followed by brachytherapy (n = 3134) or whole-breast irradiation (n = 42,750). We stratified patients into risk groups according to age (Age < 50 vs Age ≥ 50) and endocrine therapy status (Endocrine- vs Endocrine+). "Endocrine+" patients filled an endocrine therapy prescription within 1 year after lumpectomy. Pathologic hormone receptor status was not available in this dataset. In brachytherapy versus WBI patients, utilization trends and 5-year subsequent mastectomy risks were compared. Stratified, adjusted subsequent mastectomy risks were calculated using proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Brachytherapy utilization increased from 2003 to 2010: in patients Age < 50, from 0.6% to 4.9%; patients Age ≥ 50 from 2.2% to 11.3%; Endocrine- patients, 1.3% to 9.4%; Endocrine+ patients, 1.9% to 9.7%. Age influenced treatment selection more than endocrine status: 17% of brachytherapy patients were Age < 50 versus 32% of WBI patients (P < .001); whereas 41% of brachytherapy patients were Endocrine-versus 44% of WBI patients (P = .003). Highest absolute 5-year subsequent mastectomy risks occurred in Endocrine-/Age < 50 patients (24.4% after brachytherapy vs 9.0% after WBI (hazard ratio [HR] 2.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37-3.47); intermediate risks in Endocrine-/Age ≥ 50 patients (8.6% vs 4.9%; HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.26-2.46); and lowest risks in Endocrine+ patients of any age: Endocrine+/Age < 50 (5.5% vs 4.5%; HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.61-2.31); Endocrine+/Age ≥ 50 (4.2% vs 2.4%; HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.16-2.51).

CONCLUSION

In this younger cohort, endocrine status was a valuable discriminatory factor predicting subsequent mastectomy risk after brachytherapy versus WBI and therefore may be useful for selecting appropriate younger brachytherapy candidates.

What is the quality of economic evaluations of non-drug therapies? A systematic review and critical appraisal of economic evaluations of radiotherapy for cancer

BACKGROUND

Breast, cervical and colorectal cancers are the three most frequent cancers in women, while lung, prostate and colorectal cancers are the most frequent in men. Much attention has been given to the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals for treatment of cancer by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the UK and similar authorities internationally, while economic analysis developed for other types of anti-cancer interventions, including radiotherapy and surgery, are less common.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to review methods used in published cost-effectiveness studies evaluating radiotherapy for breast, cervical, colorectal, head and neck and prostate cancer, and to compare the economic evaluation methods applied with those defined in the guidelines used by the NICE technology appraisal programme.

METHODS

A systematic search of seven databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CDSR, NHSEED, HTA, DARE, EconLit) as well as research registers, the NICE website and conference proceedings was conducted in July 2012. Only economic evaluations of radiotherapy interventions in individuals diagnosed with cancer that included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) or life-years (LYs) were included. Included studies were appraised on the basis of satisfying essential, preferred and UK-specific methods requirements, building on the NICE Reference Case for economic evaluations and on other methods guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria (breast 14, colorectal 2, prostate 10, cervical 0, head and neck 3). Only two studies were conducted in the UK (13 in the USA). Among essential methods criteria, the main issue was that only three (10%) of the studies used clinical-effectiveness estimates identified through systematic review of the literature. Similarly, only eight (28%) studies sourced health-related quality-of-life data directly from patients with the condition of interest. Other essential criteria (e.g. clear description of comparators, patient group indication and appropriate time horizon) were generally fulfilled, while most of the UK-specific requirements were not met.

CONCLUSION

Based on this review there is a dearth of up-to-date, robust evidence on the cost effectiveness of radiotherapy in cancer suitable to support decision making in the UK. Studies selected did not fully satisfy essential method standards currently recommended by NICE.

Accelerated partial breast irradiation with intensity-modulated radiotherapy is feasible for chinese breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Several accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) techniques are being investigated in patients with early-stage breast cancer. The present study evaluated the feasibility, early toxicity, initial efficacy, and cosmetic outcomes of accelerated partial breast intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for Chinese female patients with early-stage breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery.

METHODS

A total of 38 patients met the inclusion criteria and an accelerated partial breast intensity-modulated radiotherapy (APBI-IMRT) plan was designed for each patient. The prescription dose was 34 Gy in 10 fractions, 3.4 Gy per fraction, twice a day, in intervals of more than 6 hours.

RESULTS

Of the 38 patients, six patients did not meet the planning criteria. The remaining 32 patients received APBI-IMRT with a mean target volume conformity index of 0.67 and a dose homogeneity index of 1.06. The median follow-up time was 53 months and no local recurrence or distant metastasis was detected. The most common acute toxicities observed within 3 months after radiotherapy were erythema, breast edema, pigmentation, and pain in the irradiated location, among which 43.8%, 12.5%, 31.3%, and 28.1% were grade 1 toxicities, respectively. The most common late toxicities occurring after 3 months until the end of the follow-up period were breast edema, pigmentation, pain in the irradiated location, and subcutaneous fibrosis, among which 6.2%, 28.1%, 21.9%, and 37.5% were grade 1 toxicities, respectively. Thirty-one patients (96.8%) had fine or excellent cosmetic outcomes, and only one patient had a poor cosmetic outcome.

CONCLUSION

It is feasible for Chinese females to receive APBI-IMRT after breast conserving surgery. The radiotherapeutic toxicity is acceptable, and both the initial efficacy and cosmetic outcomes are good.

For-profit hospital ownership status and use of brachytherapy after breast-conserving surgery

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the relationship between operative care for breast cancer at for-profit hospitals and subsequent use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT). Among Medicare beneficiaries, we examined whether hospital ownership status is associated with the use of breast brachytherapy--a newer and more expensive modality--as well as overall RT.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of female Medicare beneficiaries who received breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer in 2008 and 2009. We assessed the relationship between hospital ownership and receipt of brachytherapy or overall RT by using hierarchical generalized linear models.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 35,118 women, 8.0% of whom had breast-conserving operations at for-profit hospitals. Among patients who received RT, those who underwent operation at for-profit hospitals were more likely to receive brachytherapy (20.2%) than patients treated at not-for-profit hospitals (15.2%; odds ratio [OR] for for-profit versus not-for-profit: 1.50; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.23-1.84; P < .001). Among women aged 66-79 years, there was no relationship between hospital ownership status and overall use of RT. Among women ages 80-94 years of age--the group least likely to benefit from RT due to shorter life expectancy--undergoing breast-conserving operations at a for-profit hospital was associated with greater overall use of RT (OR 1.22; 95% CI 1.03-1.45, P = .03) and brachytherapy use (OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.18-2.34, P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Operative care at for-profit hospitals was associated with increased use of the newer and more expensive RT modality, brachytherapy. Among the oldest women who are least likely to benefit from RT, operative care at a for-profit hospital was associated with greater overall use of RT, with this difference largely driven by the use of brachytherapy.

Shortened radiation therapy schedules for early-stage breast cancer: a review of hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation and accelerated partial breast irradiation

Breast-conserving therapy consisting of segmental mastectomy followed by whole-breast irradiation (WBI) has become widely accepted as an alternative to mastectomy as a treatment for women with early-stage breast cancer. WBI is typically delivered over the course of 5-6 weeks to the whole breast. Hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation and accelerated partial breast irradiation have developed as alternative radiation techniques for select patients with favorable early-stage breast cancer. These radiation regimens allow for greater patient convenience and the potential for decreased health care costs. We review here the scientific rationale behind delivering a shorter course of radiation therapy using these distinct treatment regimens in this setting as well as an overview of the published data and pending trials comparing these alternative treatment regimens to WBI.

Intraoperative Period and Breast Cancer: Review

Intraoperative radiation therapy in breast cancer (IORT) delivers a concentrated dose of radiation therapy to a tumor bed during surgery. IORT offers some of the following advantages with typically fewer complications like; maximum effect, sparing healthy tissues and organs, to help the patients finish treatment and get back to their normal activities. The goal of IORT is to improve local tumor control and survival rates for patients with breast cancer. IORT can both be performed with electron beams (ELIOT) and X-rays. Two main randomised trials testing intraoperative partial breast radiotherapy are TARGIT trial and the ELIOT (intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons) trial, but the techniques are fundamentally different. Whereas TARGIT delivers radiation from within the undisturbed tumour bed, for ELIOT, the mammary gland is mobilised, a prepectoral lead shield is inserted, the edges of the tumour bed are apposed, and radiation is delivered from without.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Shortened courses of radiation therapy have been shown to be similarly effective to whole-breast external-beam radiation therapy (WB-EBRT) in terms of local control. We sought to analyze, from a societal perspective, the cost-effectiveness of two radiation strategies for early-stage invasive breast cancer: single-dose intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) and the standard 6-week course of WB-EBRT.

METHODS

We developed a Markov decision-analytic model to evaluate these treatment strategies in terms of life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over 10 years.

RESULTS

IORT single-dose intraoperative radiation therapy was the dominant, more cost-effective strategy, providing greater quality-adjusted life years at a decreased cost compared with 6-week WB-EBRT. The model was sensitive to health state utilities and recurrence rates, but not costs. IORT was either the preferred or dominant strategy across all sensitivity analyses. The two-way sensitivity analyses demonstrate the need to accurately determine utility values for the two forms of radiation treatment and to avoid indiscriminate use of IORT.

CONCLUSIONS

With less cost and greater QALYs than WB-EBRT, IORT is the more valuable strategy. IORT offers a unique example of new technology that is less costly than the current standard of care option but offers similar efficacy. Even when considering the capital investment for the equipment ($425 K, low when compared with the investments required for robotic surgery or high-dose-rate brachytherapy), which could be recouped after 3-4 years conservatively, these results support IORT as a change in practice for treating early-stage invasive breast cancer.

Cost-efficacy of acceleration partial-breast irradiation compared with whole-breast irradiation

The purpose of this study was to analyze the cost-efficacy of multiple accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) techniques compared with whole breast irradiation (WBI) delivered utilizing 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). A previously reported matched-pair analysis consisting of 199 patients receiving WBI and 199 patients receiving interstitial APBI formed the basis of this analysis. Cost analyses included a cost minimization analysis, incremental cost- effectiveness ratio (ICER) analysis, and cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) analysis. Per 1,000 patients treated, the cost savings with the utilization of APBI compared to WBI IMRT is $14.9 million, $10.9 million, $8.8 million, $5.0 million, and $9.7 million for APBI 3D-CRT, APBI IMRT, APBI single-lumen (SL), APBI multi-lumen (ML), and APBI interstitial, respectively. Per 1,000 patients treated, the cost savings with the utilization of APBI compared to WBI 3D-CRT is $6.0 million, $2.0 million, and $0.7 million for APBI 3D-CRT, APBI IMRT, and APBI interstitial, respectively. The cost per QALY for APBI SL, APBI ML, and APBI interstitial compared with APBI 3D-CRT are $12,273, $66,032, and $546, respectively. When incorporating non-medical costs and cost of recurrences the cost per QALY was $54,698 and $49,009 for APBI ML compared with APBI 3D-CRT. When compared to WBI IMRT, all APBI techniques are cost-effective based on cost minimization, ICER, and QALY analyses. When compared to WBI 3D-CRT, external beam APBI techniques represent a more cost-effective approach based on cost minimization with brachytherapy representing a cost-effective approach based on cost per QALY.

Cost comparison of radiation treatment options after lumpectomy for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Radiation therapy (RT) after lumpectomy for breast cancer can be delivered with several different regimens. We evaluated a cost-minimization strategy to select among RT options.

METHODS

An institutional review board (IRB)-approved retrospective review identified a sample of 100 women who underwent lumpectomy for invasive or in situ breast cancer during 2009. Post lumpectomy RT options included: no radiation in women ≥70 years [T1N0, estrogen receptor (ER)+] per Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9343 (no-RT), accelerated external-beam partial-breast irradiation (APBI), and Canadian fractionation (C-RT), as alternatives to standard whole-breast radiation therapy (WBRT). Eligibility for RT regimens was based on published criteria. RT costs were estimated using the 2011 US Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and average Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes billed per regimen at our institution. Costs were modeled in a 1,000-patient theoretical cohort.

RESULTS

Median patient age was 56.5 years (range 32-93 years). Tumor histology included invasive ductal cancer (78 %), ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (15 %), invasive lobular cancer (6 %), and mixed histology (1 %). Median tumor size was 1 cm (range 0.2-5 cm). Estimated per-patient cost of radiation was US$5,341.81 for APBI, US$9,121.98 for C-RT, and US$13,358.37 for WBRT. When patients received the least expensive radiation regimen for which they were eligible, 14 % received no-RT, 44 % received APBI, 7 % received C-RT, and 35 % defaulted to WBRT. Using a cost-minimization strategy, estimated RT costs were US$7.67 million, versus US$13.36 million had all patients received WBRT, representing cost savings of US$5.69 million per 1,000 patients treated.

CONCLUSIONS

A cost-minimization strategy results in a 43 % reduction in estimated radiation costs among women undergoing breast conservation.

Feasibility of accelerated partial breast irradiation in a large inner-city public hospital

BACKGROUND

Breast conserving therapy (BCT) that include breast conserving surgery followed by adjuvant radiation therapy has revolutioned medicine by allowing women to avoid mastectomy. Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) has emerged as a valid alternative to whole-breast irradiation that requires a shorter time commitment. We report our novel experience with APBI at a large public hospital that serves low-income and potentially noncompliant patients.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted of women who underwent BCT for stage 0-IIA breast cancer from August 2007 to August 2010 treated with APBI with a brachytherapy catheter.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients (20 African American) were considered for APBI. Average age was 61 years. Four patients could not undergo APBI for technical reasons and completed whole-breast irradiation over a 5 week period. Median follow-up was 19 months. Nine patients (37.5 %) had ductal carcinoma-in-situ, and 15 patients (62.5 %) had invasive ductal carcinoma with an average tumor size of 1.1 cm. All patients had negative margins of >2 mm. Two patients (8 %) treated with the brachytherapy catheter had in-breast tumor recurrence. Thus, all 24 patients initially identified for APBI successfully completed adjuvant radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient compliance with postoperative irradiation is key to minimize local recurrence after BCT for breast cancer. This success with a brachytherapy catheter in underserved women in a U.S. public hospital setting indicates that outcomes of compliance and complications are comparable to nationally published results.

A comparison of quality of life of early breast cancer patients treated with accelerated partial breast irradiation versus whole breast irradiation in China

To compare quality of life (QoL) of early breast cancer patients treated with either accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) or whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast-conserving therapy in China. The functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-Breast, traditional Chinese version 4 (FACT-B) instruments were given to 84 women (31 APBI and 53 WBI) who attended the radiotherapy clinic between July 2006 and May 2009 at Cancer Center of Sun Yat-sen University. Baseline characteristics and Karnofsky performance status scores were not different between the two groups. The median follow-up period in the APBI group was 29 versus 34 months in the WBI group. The APBI group scores in the physical domain, functional domain, social domain, and breast-specific concerns of FACT-B were 23.01 ± 3.91, 17.97 ± 4.99, 20.87 ± 4.80, and 22.55 ± 5.45, respectively, and were not significantly different from those of the WBI group (22.80 ± 3.50, 17.50 ± 4.40, 20.13 ± 5.31, 23.81 ± 4.65, respectively, P = 0.987, P = 0.476, P = 0.442, P = 0.330, respectively). However, the scores of the APBI group with respect to the emotional domains were lower compared to those of the WBI group (16.84 ± 3.86 vs. 19.47 ± 3.45, respectively, P = 0.002). Compared with women who underwent WBI, women treated with APBI were shown to have no significantly better QoL outcome, and yet had worse emotional response to their treatment.

Video surface image guidance for external beam partial breast irradiation

OBJECTIVE

Accelerated partial breast irradiation is an emerging treatment option for early stage breast cancer. With accelerated partial breast irradiation, patient setup, and target registration accuracy is vital. The current study compared various methods for isocenter placement accuracy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty-three patients treated on an institutional-approved partial breast irradiation protocol were monitored at each treatment fraction. All patients included in this study underwent clip placement at the time of surgery. Patients underwent computed tomographic simulation and surface contours were used to reconstruct a reference surface map. At the treatment machine, patients were initially positioned by laser alignment to tattoos. Orthogonal kilovoltage imaging of the chest wall, followed by video surface mapping of the breast, was performed. This video surface map was matched to the reference surface map to adjust the couch position. Verification orthogonal chest wall imaging and video surface mapping was again performed. The accuracy of setup by laser, orthogonal imaging of the chest wall, and surface alignment was retrospectively compared using the centroid clip position as the reference standard. The impact of setup error by surface alignment and by orthogonal kilovoltage imaging on planning target volume coverage was then calculated.

RESULTS

Laser-based positioning resulted in a residual setup error of 3.9 ± 3.7 mm, 4.6 ± 3.9 mm, and 4.3 ± 4.5 mm in the posterior-anterior (P-A), inferior-superior (I-S), and left-right (L-R) directions, respectively, using clips as the reference standard. Setup based on bony anatomy with orthogonal imaging resulted in residual setup error of 3.2 ± 2.9 (P-A), 4.2 ± 3.5 (I-S), and 4.7 ± 5.3 mm (L-R). Setup with video surface mapping resulted in a residual setup error of 1.9 ± 2.2, 1.8 ± 1.9, and 1.8 ± 2.1 mm in the P-A, I-S, and L-R directions, respectively. Vector spatial deviation was 8.8 ± 4.2, 8.3 ± 3.8, and 4.0 ± 2.3 mm with laser, chest wall on board imaging, and video surface mapping based setup, respectively. Setup by video surface mapping resulted in improved dosimetric coverage of the planning target volume when compared with orthogonal imaging of the chest wall (V100 96.0% ± 0.1% vs 89.3% ± 0.2%; V95 99.7% ± 0.01% vs 98.6% ± 0.01%, P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Video surface mapping of the breast is a more accurate method for isocenter placement in comparison to conventional laser-based alignment or orthogonal kilovoltage imaging of the chest wall.

Cost-effectiveness studies in radiation therapy

The field of radiation therapy has made dramatic technical advances over the past 20 years. 3D conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy and proton beam therapy have all been developed in an attempt to improve the therapeutic ratio: higher cure rates with lower toxicity. Unfortunately, although the costs of radiation therapy are certainly increasing, it is unclear whether its clinical benefit has also improved. Cost-effectiveness analyses are designed to formally evaluate the cost of a treatment relative to an associated change in quality-adjusted survival. As the cost of oncologic care is increasing, it is critically important to assess the cost-effectiveness of radiation therapy. This article will describe the issues surrounding the delivery and cost of radiation therapy, and it will summarize the work that has been done to evaluate the use of cost-effectiveness in radiation oncology.

Brachytherapy for Accelerated Partial-Breast Irradiation: A Rapidly Emerging Technology in Breast Cancer Care

Purpose

Brachytherapy is a method for delivering partial-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). It is currently used in the community setting, although its efficacy has yet to be validated in prospective comparative trials. Frequency and factors influencing use have not been previously identified.

Methods

In a nationwide database of 6,882 Medicare beneficiaries (age ≥ 65 years) with private supplemental insurance (MarketScan Medicare Supplemental), claims codes identified patients treated with brachytherapy versus external-beam radiation after BCS for incident breast cancer (diagnosed from 2001 to 2006). Logistic regression modeled predictors of brachytherapy use.

Results

Frequency of brachytherapy use as an alternative to external-beam radiation after BCS increased over time (< 1% in 2001, 2% in 2002, 3% in 2003, 5% in 2004, 8% in 2005, 10% in 2006; P < .001). Increased use correlated temporally with US Food and Drug Administration approval and Medicare reimbursement of brachytherapy technology. Brachytherapy use was more likely in women with lymph node–negative disease (odds ratio [OR], 2.19; 95% CI, 1.17 to 4.11) or axillary surgery (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.23 to 2.44). Brachytherapy use was also more likely in women with non–health maintenance organization insurance (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.24 to 2.64) and in areas with higher median income (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.05 to 2.38), lower density of radiation oncologists (OR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.86), or higher density of surgeons (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.07 to 2.31).

Conclusion

Despite ongoing questions regarding efficacy, breast brachytherapy was rapidly incorporated into the care of older, insured patients. In our era of frequently emerging novel technologies yet growing demands to optimize costs and outcomes, results provide insight into how clinical, policy, and socioeconomic factors influence new technology diffusion into conventional care.

Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI): A review of available techniques

Breast conservation therapy (BCT) is the procedure of choice for the management of the early stage breast cancer. However, its utilization has not been maximized because of logistics issues associated with the protracted treatment involved with the radiation treatment. Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI) is an approach that treats only the lumpectomy bed plus a 1-2 cm margin, rather than the whole breast. Hence because of the small volume of irradiation a higher dose can be delivered in a shorter period of time. There has been growing interest for APBI and various approaches have been developed under phase I-III clinical studies; these include multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy, balloon catheter brachytherapy, conformal external beam radiation therapy and intra-operative radiation therapy (IORT). Balloon-based brachytherapy approaches include Mammosite, Axxent electronic brachytherapy and Contura, Hybrid brachytherapy devices include SAVI and ClearPath. This paper reviews the different techniques, identifying the weaknesses and strength of each approach and proposes a direction for future research and development. It is evident that APBI will play a role in the management of a selected group of early breast cancer. However, the relative role of the different techniques is yet to be clearly identified.

Hypofractionated breast radiotherapy: financial and economic consequences

A large amount of clinical evidence has recently accumulated supporting the efficacy and safety of hypofractionated radiotherapy for post-operative breast cancer. These schedules, typically delivering a lower total dose in fewer, but larger than 2 Gy fractions, are more convenient for the patients by limiting the number of treatment attendances. Moreover, the reduced resource use in terms of personnel and machine time is advantageous for radiotherapy departments and translates into lower treatment costs. In order to formally validate this therapeutic approach from a societal perspective, however, cost-effectiveness evaluations weighing long-term outcome against the societal costs incurred until many years after treatment are needed.

Role of positron emission tomography in the treatment of occult disease in head-and-neck cancer: a modeling approach

PURPOSE

To determine under what conditions positron emission tomography (PET) imaging will be useful in decisions regarding the use of radiotherapy for the treatment of clinically occult lymph node metastases in head-and-neck cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A decision model of PET imaging and its downstream effects on radiotherapy outcomes was constructed using an influence diagram. This model included the sensitivity and specificity of PET, as well as the type and stage of the primary tumor. These parameters were varied to determine the optimal strategy for imaging and therapy for different clinical situations. Maximum expected utility was the metric by which different actions were ranked.

RESULTS

For primary tumors with a low probability of lymph node metastases, the sensitivity of PET should be maximized, and 50 Gy should be delivered if PET is positive and 0 Gy if negative. As the probability for lymph node metastases increases, PET imaging becomes unnecessary in some situations, and the optimal dose to the lymph nodes increases. The model needed to include the causes of certain health states to predict current clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The model demonstrated the ability to reproduce expected outcomes for a range of tumors and provided recommendations for different clinical situations. The differences between the optimal policies and current clinical practice are likely due to a disparity between stated clinical decision processes and actual decision making by clinicians.