Cost-effectiveness of intraperitoneal chemohyperthermia in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer

Hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery for people with peritoneal metastases: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

We compared the relative benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery ± systemic chemotherapy versus cytoreductive surgery ± systemic chemotherapy or systemic chemotherapy alone in people with peritoneal metastases from colorectal, gastric or ovarian cancers by a systematic review, meta-analysis and model-based cost-utility analysis.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and the Science Citation Index, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP trial registers until 14 April 2022. We included only randomised controlled trials addressing the research objectives. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2 to assess the risk of bias in randomised controlled trials. We used the random-effects model for data synthesis when applicable. For the cost-effectiveness analysis, we performed a model-based cost-utility analysis using methods recommended by The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

Results

The systematic review included a total of eight randomised controlled trials (seven randomised controlled trials, 955 participants included in the quantitative analysis). All comparisons other than those for stage III or greater epithelial ovarian cancer contained only one trial, indicating the paucity of randomised controlled trials that provided data. For colorectal cancer, hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy probably results in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (60.6% vs. 60.6%; hazard ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 1.58) and may increase the serious adverse event proportions compared to cytoreductive surgery ± systemic chemotherapy (25.6% vs. 15.2%; risk ratio 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 2.77). Hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy probably decreases all-cause mortality compared to fluorouracil-based systemic chemotherapy alone (40.8% vs. 60.8%; hazard ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.95). For gastric cancer, there is high uncertainty about the effects of hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy versus cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy or systemic chemotherapy alone on all-cause mortality. For stage III or greater epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing interval cytoreductive surgery, hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy probably decreases all-cause mortality compared to cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy (46.3% vs. 57.4%; hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.93). Hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy may not be cost-effective versus cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy for colorectal cancer but may be cost-effective for the remaining comparisons.

Limitations

We were unable to obtain individual participant data as planned. The limited number of randomised controlled trials for each comparison and the paucity of data on health-related quality of life mean that the recommendations may change as new evidence (from trials with a low risk of bias) emerges.

Conclusions

In people with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer with limited peritoneal metastases and who are likely to withstand major surgery, hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy should not be used in routine clinical practice (strong recommendation). There is considerable uncertainty as to whether hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy or cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy should be offered to patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal metastases (no recommendation). Hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy should be offered routinely to women with stage III or greater epithelial ovarian cancer and metastases confined to the abdomen requiring and likely to withstand interval cytoreductive surgery after chemotherapy (strong recommendation).

Future work

More randomised controlled trials are necessary.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019130504.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/135/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 51. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Building an Efficient Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Program Despite the Lower-Middle-Income Barriers: Ukraine Experience

PURPOSE

Cytoreductive surgery/hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) programs are often limited to centers in developed countries because of extensive requirements. We aimed to analyze efficacy and challenges of CRS/HIPEC centers in lower-middle-income settings in the Ukraine example.

METHODS

A multicenter descriptive study was conducted using data sets (2008-2022) from Kyiv, Lviv, and Odesa centers. Patients with appendiceal neoplasm (AN); colorectal cancer (CRC); malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM); and epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer (EOC) treated with CRS ± HIPEC were included. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed for N ≥ 20 cohorts using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

We included 596 patients. At Kyiv and Lviv centers, 37 and 28 patients with AN had completeness of cytoreduction (CC-0/1) rates of 84% and 71%, respectively. Thirty-day major morbidity stood at 24% and 18%, respectively. Median OS was not reached (NR) at both centers. Nineteen patients with CRC from Kyiv, 11 from Lviv, and 156 from Odesa had CC-0/1 rates of 84%, 91%, and 86%, respectively. Thirty-day major complications occurred in 16%, 18%, and 8%, respectively. Median OS in the Odesa cohort was 35 (95% CI, 32 to 38) months. Among 15 Kyiv, five Lviv, and six Odesa patients with MPM, CC-0/1 rates were 67%, 80%, and 100%, respectively, while major complications occurred in 13%, 0%, and 17%, respectively. OS was not analyzed because of small MPM cohorts. At Kyiv, Lviv, and Odesa centers, 91, 40, and 89 patients, respectively, had primary EOC. CC-0/1 rates were 79%, 100%, and 80%, and 30-day major morbidity rates were 23%, 5%, and 6%, respectively. Median OS was NR, 71 (95% CI, 32 to 110), and 67 (95% CI, 61 to 73) months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

CRS/HIPEC programs in lower-middle-income environment can achieve safety and survival that meet global standards. Our discussion highlights common obstacles in such settings and proposes effective overcoming strategies.

Adoption of cytoreductive surgery in the management of peritoneal malignancies-Global trends

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has now been accepted as an integral component in the management of gastrointestinal and gynecological cancers with peritoneal metastases. Since the adoption of CRS is influenced by access to advanced medical facilities, trained multidisciplinary teams, and funding, there is wide variability in incorporation of CRS into routine clinical practice between high- versus low- and middle-income countries. This review highlights the global trends in the adoption of CRS for peritoneal malignancies with a specific focus on the establishment of CRS programs and barriers to incorporate CRS into routine clinical care in low- and middle-income countries.

Impact of cumulative complications on 1-year treatment-related healthcare costs in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of all minor and major complications on treatment-related healthcare costs in patients who undergo cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the treatment of colorectal peritoneal metastases (PMs).

Method

Patients with histologically proven colorectal PMs who underwent CRS + HIPEC from March 2006 to October 2019 in a tertiary referral centre were retrospectively identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients were divided into six subgroups according to the severity of the complications, which were scored using the comprehensive complication index (CCI) (CCI 0–9.9, CCI 10–19.9, CCI 20–29.9, CCI 30–39.9, CCI 40–49.9, and CCI 50 or higher). Treatment-related healthcare costs up to 1 year after CRS + HIPEC were obtained from the financial department. Differences in costs and survival outcomes were compared using the chi-squared test and Kruskal–Wallis H test.

Results

A total of 142 patients were included (CCI 0–9.9, 53 patients; CCI 10–19.9, 0 patients; CCI 20–29.9, 45 patients; CCI 30–39.9, 14 patients; CCI 40–49, 9 patients; and CCI 50 or higher, 21 patients). Median (interquartile range) treatment-related healthcare costs increased significantly and exponentially for the CCI 30–39, CCI 40–49, and CCI 50 or higher groups (€48 993 (€44 262–€84 805); €57 167 (€43 047–€67 591); and €82 219 (€55 487–€145 314) respectively) compared with those for the CCI 0–9.9 and CCI 20–29.9 groups (€33 856 (€24 433–€40 779) and €40 621 (€31 501–€58 761) respectively, P < 0.010).

Conclusion

Treatment-related healthcare costs increase exponentially as more complications develop among patients who undergo CRS + HIPEC for the treatment of colorectal PMs. Anastomotic leakages after CRS + HIPEC lead to an increase of 295 per cent of treatment-related healthcare costs.

Cost-analysis of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with peritoneal malignancy: An Australian perspective with global application

BACKGROUND

Cost-effective cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for treatment of patients with peritoneal malignancy remains an ongoing financial challenge for healthcare systems, hospitals and patients. This study aims to describe the detailed in-hospital costs of CRS and HIPEC compared with an Australian Activity Based Funding (ABF) system, and to evaluate how the learning curve, disease entities and surgical outcomes influence in-hospital costs.

METHODS

A retrospective descriptive costing review of all CRS and HIPEC cases undertaken at a large public tertiary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia from April 2017 to June 2019. In-hospital cost variables included staff, critical care, diagnosis, operating theatre, and other costs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to investigate the differences between actual cost and the provision of funding, and potential factors associated with these costs.

RESULTS

Of the 118 CRS and HIPEC procedures included in the analyses, the median total cost was AU$130,804 (IQR: 105,744 to 153,972). Provision of funding via the ABF system was approximately one-third of the total CRS and HIPEC costs (p < 0.001). Surgical staff proficiency seems to reduce the total CRS and HIPEC costs. Surgical time, length of intensive care unit and hospital stay are the main predictors of total CRS and HIPEC costs.

CONCLUSION

Delivery of CRS and HIPEC is expensive with high variability. A standard ABF system grossly underestimates the specific CRS and HIPEC funding required with supplementation essential to sustaining this complex highly specialised service.

Impact of extent of disease on 1-year healthcare costs in patients who undergo cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal metastases: retrospective observational cohort study

Background

The goal of this retrospective observational study was to determine the impact of the extent of peritoneal disease on 1‐year healthcare costs in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) who undergo cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC). The extent of peritoneal disease, expressed by the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI), directly affects the complexity of CRS + HIPEC and ultimately survival outcomes. The impact of the PCI on treatment‐related healthcare costs remains unknown.

Methods

Data from patients with colorectal PM who underwent CRS + HIPEC between January 2012 and November 2017 were extracted retrospectively from an institutional database. Patients were divided into four subgroups with PCI scores ranging from 0 to 20. Treatment‐related costs up to 1 year after CRS + HIPEC were obtained from the financial department. Differences in costs and survival outcomes were compared using the χ² test and Kruskal−Wallis H test.

Results

Seventy‐three patients were included (PCI 0–5, 22 patients; PCI 6–10, 19 patients; PCI 11–15, 17 patients; PCI 16–20, 15 patients). Median (i.q.r.) costs were significantly increased for the PCI 11–15 and PCI 16–20 groups (€51 029 (42 500–58 575) and €46 548 (35 194–60 533) respectively) compared with those for the PCI 0–5 and PCI 6–10 groups (€33 856 (25 293–42 235) and €39 013 (30 519–51 334) respectively) (P = 0·009).

Conclusion

Treatment‐related healthcare costs are significantly increased among patients with extensive tumour burden (PCI score 10 or above) who undergo CRS + HIPEC for the treatment of colorectal PM.

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) versus standard of care (SoC) in people with peritoneal metastases from colorectal, ovarian or gastric origin: protocol for a systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

INTRODUCTION

There is uncertainty about whether cytoreductive surgery (CRS)+hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) improves survival and/or quality of life compared with standard of care (SoC) in people with peritoneal metastases who can withstand major surgery.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative benefits and harms of CRS+HIPEC versus SoC in people with peritoneal metastases from colorectal, ovarian or gastric cancers eligible to undergo CRS+HIPEC by a systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES

To compare the cost-effectiveness of CRS+HIPEC versus SoC from a National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services perspective using a model-based cost-utility analysis.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform a systematic review of literature by updating the searches from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane library, Science Citation Index as well as trial registers. Two members of our team will independently screen the search results and identify randomised controlled trials comparing CRS+HIPEC versus SoC for inclusion based on full texts for articles shortlisted during screening. We will assess the risk of bias in the trials and obtain data related to baseline prognostic characteristics, details of intervention and control, and outcome data related to overall survival, disease progression, health-related quality of life, treatment related complications and resource utilisation data. Using IPD, we will perform a two-step IPD, that is, calculate the adjusted effect estimate from each included study and then perform a random-effects model meta-analysis. We will perform various subgroup analyses, meta-regression and sensitivity analyses. We will also perform a model-based cost-utility analysis to assess whether CRS+HIPEC is cost-effective in the NHS setting.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This project was approved by the UCL Research Ethics Committee (Ethics number: 16023/001). We aim to present the findings at appropriate international meetings and publish the review, irrespective of the findings, in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019130504.

Cost Effectiveness of Interval Cytoreductive Surgery With Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Stage III Ovarian Cancer on the Basis of a Randomized Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

In the randomized open-label phase III OVHIPEC trial, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) improved recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with stage III ovarian cancer. We studied the cost effectiveness of the addition of HIPEC to interval CRS in patients with ovarian cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We constructed a Markov health-state transition model to measure costs and clinical outcomes. Transition probabilities were derived from the OVHIPEC trial by fitting survival distributions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as euros per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), was calculated from a Dutch societal perspective, with a time horizon of 10 years. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the decision uncertainty.

RESULTS

Total health care costs were €70,046 (95% credibility interval [CrI], €64,016 to €76,661) for interval CRS compared with €85,791 (95% CrI, €78,766 to €93,935) for interval CRS plus HIPEC. The mean QALY in the interval CRS group was 2.12 (95% CrI, 1.66 to 2.64 QALYs) and 2.68 (95% CrI, 2.11 to 3.28 QALYs) in the interval CRS plus HIPEC group. The ICER amounted to €28,299/QALY. In univariable sensitivity analysis, the utility of recurrence-free survival and the number of days in the hospital affected the calculated ICER most.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of the trial data, treatment with interval CRS and HIPEC in patients with stage III ovarian cancer was accompanied by a substantial gain in QALYs. The ICER is below the willingness-to-pay threshold in the Netherlands, indicating interval CRS and HIPEC is cost effective for this patient population. These results lend additional support for reimbursing the costs of treating these patients with interval CRS and HIPEC in countries with comparable health care systems.

Major influence of postoperative complications on costs of cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases

Complications after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) result in impaired short- and long-term outcomes. However, financial consequences of complications after CRS and HIPEC in a European health care setting are unknown. This study aims to assess the consequences of complications on hospital costs after CRS and HIPEC.In this prospective observational cohort study, patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases treated with CRS and HIPEC were included. Financial information was collected according to the Dutch manual for costs analyses. Costs were compared between patients without complications (NC), minor complications (MC), or severe complications (SC), according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.One hundred and sixty-one patients were included, of whom 42% experienced NC, 27% MC and 31% SC. Mean hospital costs were &OV0556;9.406 ± 2.235 in NC patients, &OV0556;12.471 ± 3.893 in MC patients, and &OV0556;29.409 ± 22.340 in SC patients. The 31% of patients with severe complications accounted for 56% of all hospital costs. Hospital admission costs in SC patients were 320% higher compared to NC patients. Costs of complications were estimated to be 43% of all admission costs.Severe postoperative complications have major influence on costs after CRS and HIPEC and result in a threefold increase of hospital costs in affected patients. This finding stresses the need for adequate risk assessment of developing severe complications after CRS and HIPEC.

Evaluation of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Colorectal Origin in the Era of Value-Based Medicine

Peritoneal spread from colorectal cancer is second only to the liver as a site for metastasis. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is a well-established treatment option for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) of colorectal origin. However, due to concerns regarding both its clinical benefit and high cost, its universal adoption as the standard of care for patients with limited peritoneal dissemination has been slow. The purpose of this review was to clarify the clinical utility and cost effectiveness of CRS-HIPEC in the treatment of colorectal PC using the framework of value-based medicine, which attempts to combine both benefit and cost into a single quantifiable metric. Our comprehensive review of the clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness of CRS-HIPEC demonstrate that it is a highly valuable oncologic therapy and a good use of healthcare resources.

Multimodality treatment strategies have changed prognosis of peritoneal metastases

For a long time, treatment of peritoneal metastases (PM) was mostly palliative and thus, this status was link with “terminal status/despair”. The current multimodal treatment strategy, consisting of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), has been strenuously achieved over time, but seems to be the best treatment option for PM patients. As we reviewed the literature data, we could emphasize some milestones and also, controversies in the history of proposed multimodal treatment and thus, outline the philosophy of this approach, which seems to be an unusual one indeed. Initially marked by nihilism and fear, but benefiting from a remarkable joint effort of human and material resources (multi-center and -institutional research), over a period of 30 years, CRS and HIPEC found their place in the treatment of PM. The next 4 years were dedicated to the refinement of the multimodal treatment, by launching research pathways. In selected patients, with requires training, it demonstrated a significant survival results (similar to the Hepatic Metastases treatment), with acceptable risks and costs. The main debates regarding CRS and HIPEC treatment were based on the oncologists’ perspective and the small number of randomized clinical trials. It is important to statement the PM patient has the right to be informed of the existence of CRS and HIPEC, as a real treatment resource, the decision being made by multidisciplinary teams.

Guidelines on the use of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with peritoneal surface malignancy arising from colorectal or appendiceal neoplasms

To meet the needs of patients, Canadian surgical and medical oncology leaders in the treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies (psms), together with patient representatives, formed the Canadian HIPEC Collaborative Group (chicg). The group is dedicated to standardizing and improving the treatment of psm in Canada so that access to treatment and, ultimately, the prognosis of Canadian patients with psm are improved. Patients with resectable psm arising from colorectal or appendiceal neoplasms should be reviewed by a multidisciplinary team including surgeons and medical oncologists with experience in treating patients with psm. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy should be offered to appropriately selected patients and performed at experienced centres. The aim of this publication is to present guidelines that we recommend be applied across the country for the treatment of psm.

Peritonectomy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: cost analysis and sustainability

BACKGROUND

Malignancies of the peritoneum remain a challenge in any hospital that accepts to manage them, due not only to difficulties associated with the complexity of the procedures involved but also the costs, which - in Italy and other countries that use a diagnosis-related group (DRG) system - are not adequately reimbursed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed data relative to 24 patients operated on between September 2010 and May 2013 with special regard to operating room expenditure, ICU stay, duration of hospitalization, and DRG reimbursement. The total costs per patient included clinical, operating room, procedure, pathology, imaging, ward care, allied healthcare, pharmaceutical, and ICU costs.

RESULTS

Postoperative hospital stay, drugs and materials, and operating room occupancy were the main factors affecting the expenditure for cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. We had a median hospitalization of 14 days, median ICU stay of 2.4 days, and median operating room occupancy of 585 min. The median expenditure for each case was € 21,744; the median reimbursement by the national health system € 8,375.

CONCLUSIONS

In a DRG reimbursement system, the economic effort in the management of patients undergoing peritonectomy procedures may not be counterbalanced by adequate reimbursement. Joint efforts between medical and administration parties are mandatory to develop appropriate treatment protocols and keep down the costs.

Association between hospital finances, payer mix, and complications after hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: deficiencies in the current healthcare reimbursement system and future implications

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing implementation of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), there are little data on its financial implications. We analyzed hospital cost and reimbursement data within the context of insurance provider type and postoperative complications.

METHODS

Clinicopathologic variables, hospital costs, and reimbursement for all patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC at a single institution from 2009 to 2013 were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients underwent CRS/HIPEC. Median PCI score was 19, and average operative time was 550 min. Tumor histology included appendiceal (n = 40; 62 %), colorectal (n = 16; 25 %), goblet cell (n = 5; 8 %), and mesothelioma (n = 3; 5 %). Median length-of-stay was 13 days. Complications occurred in 42 patients (66 %), including 13 (20 %) with major (Clavien grade III-IV) complications. Payer mix included 42 private insurance and 22 Medicare/Medicaid. Financial data was available for 56 patients: average total hospital cost was $49,248 and reimbursement was $63,771, for a hospital profit of $14,523/patient. Despite similar costs between Medicare/Medicaid and private-insurance patients, Medicare/Medicaid reimbursed much less ($30,713 vs $80,747; p < 0.001), resulting in a net loss of $17,342 per patient. For private-insured patients, major complications were associated with increased cost and increased reimbursement, resulting in a net profit of $36,285, compared with a net loss of $54,274 in Medicare/Medicaid patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CRS/HIPEC is profitable in privately insured patients, even for those with major complications, but loses money in patients with Medicare/Medicaid. Under a future bundled-reimbursement system, complications will be negatively associated with profit. With these impending changes, hospitals must place emphasis on value, recalculate the reimbursement necessary for financial viability, and focus on decreasing costs and minimizing complications.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF HUMAN LEUKOCYTE ANTIGEN MATCHING IN PENETRATING KERATOPLASTY

Background: The matching of favorable human leukocyte antigen (HLA) combinations is rarely performed in penetrating keratoplasty procedures for primary prophylaxis of immune reactions. However, clinical studies suggest that the incidence of graft rejection decreases substantially when patients receive favorably matched grafts.Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of HLA matching for patients undergoing penetrating keratoplasty in everyday clinical practice.Methods: In the absence of a randomized controlled clinical trial, we used administrative data from the Freiburg University Eye Hospital in Germany. Our study population consisted of all patients who underwent their first keratoplasty between 11/2003 and 01/2010 and for whom information on HLA histocompatibility was available. We used propensity score matching to estimate a causal effect of favorable HLA matching, parametric survival regression techniques to predict graft survival and expert opinion to model incremental cost for HLA matching. Because the availability of favorable HLA histocompatibility ultimately depends on the patients' HLA phenotype, we modeled the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) as a function of the probability that a patient will receive a favorably matched HLA, and used expert opinion to set a point estimate.Results: We predicted that corneal grafts with favorable HLA matching were associated with improved rejection-free graft survival time (more than 1,000 days). We estimated the incremental cost of HLA matching at EUR 1,200 and the ICER at EUR 4.62 per additional day of graft survival.Conclusions: The ICER of HLA matching is acceptable, given the high cost of alternative treatment and the shortage of corneal donors in Germany.

Costs and clinical outcome of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy followed by cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The costs for loco-regional treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer are not well investigated. The aims of this study were to evaluate the costs and clinical outcome of systemic chemotherapy followed by cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy compared to systemic chemotherapy only in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ten patients were scheduled for systemic chemotherapy followed by loco-regional treatment. A reference group of 10 matched control patients treated with systemic chemotherapy only were used and both groups were evaluated with respect to clinical outcome and cost.

RESULTS

The mean overall cost in the loco-regional group was $145,700 (range $49,900-$487,800) and $59,300 (range $23,000-$94,800) for the control group. The mean overall survival for the loco-regional group was 17.4 months (range 6.0-34.3), and 11.1 months (range 0.1-24.2) for the systemic chemotherapy only group. The gain in life-years was 0.52 and in quality-adjusted life-years 0.49, leading to incremental cost per life-year and quality-adjusted life-years gained of $166,716 and $175,164, for loco-regional group compared to systemic chemotherapy.

DISCUSSION

Treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer is costly irrespective of treatment modality. If the survival benefit from adding loco-regional treatment to systemic chemotherapy indicated from this comparison is true, the incremental cost is considered high.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of individualized mycophenolate mofetil dosing in kidney transplant patients in the APOMYGRE trial

BACKGROUND

In the prospective, randomized, multicenter APOMYGRE trial conducted in France, concentration-controlled mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) dosing based on mycophenolic acid (MPA) exposure significantly reduced the treatment failure and acute rejection during the first posttransplantation year compared with fixed-dose MMF. This analysis investigated the cost effectiveness of dose individualization.

METHOD

The study included 65 patients per group (intent-to-treat population). Treatment failure (primary efficacy endpoint) was defined as death, graft loss, acute rejection, or MMF discontinuation because of adverse effects. Data on hospitalizations, drugs prescribed, physicians' fees, laboratory expenses, ambulatory visits, and transportation were retrieved. Costs were calculated from the French National Health System perspective.

RESULTS

The mean (95% confidence interval) total yearly cost per patient was Euro 47,477 (Euro 43,933; Euro 51,020) in the concentration-controlled group and Euro 46,783 ( Euro 44,152; Euro 49,414) in the fixed-dose group (P=0.7). The observed incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was Euro 3757 per treatment failure (Purchasing Power Parities United States/France: $4129). Hospitalization and drug costs accounted for approximately 50% and 25% of total costs, respectively. The cost for MPA area under the concentration-time curve and dose calculation was Euro 452 per patient, less than 1% of the total cost.

CONCLUSION

In the APOMYGRE trial, therapeutic MPA monitoring using a limited sampling strategy reduced the risk of treatment failure and acute rejection in renal allograft recipients during the first 12 months posttransplantation, at neutral cost.

Complete Cytoreductive Surgery Plus Intraperitoneal Chemohyperthermia With Oxaliplatin for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Colorectal Origin

Purpose

To compare the long-term survival of patients with isolated and resectable peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) in comparable groups of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy containing oxaliplatin or irinotecan or by cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

Patients and Methods

All patients with gross PC from colorectal adenocarcinoma who had undergone cytoreductive surgery plus HIPEC from 1998 to 2003 were evaluated. The standard group was constituted by selecting patients with colorectal PC treated with palliative chemotherapy during the same period, but who had not benefited from HIPEC because the technique was unavailable in the center at that time.

Results

Forty-eight patients were retrospectively included in the standard group and were compared with 48 patients who had undergone HIPEC and were evaluated prospectively. All characteristics were comparable except age and tumor differentiation. There was no difference in systemic chemotherapy, with a mean of 2.3 lines per patient. Median follow-up was 95.7 months in the standard group versus 63 months in the HIPEC group. Two-year and 5-year overall survival rates were 81% and 51% for the HIPEC group, respectively, and 65% and 13% for the standard group, respectively. Median survival was 23.9 months in the standard group versus 62.7 months in the HIPEC group (P < .05, log-rank test).

Conclusion

Patients with isolated, resectable PC achieve a median survival of 24 months with modern chemotherapies, but only surgical cytoreduction plus HIPEC is able to prolong median survival to roughly 63 months, with a 5-year survival rate of 51%.