Decision-analytic model and cost-effectiveness evaluation of postmastectomy radiation therapy in high-risk premenopausal breast cancer patients

Cost-effectiveness of Post-Mastectomy Radiotherapy (PMRT) for breast cancer in India: An economic modelling study

Background

The role of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) for breast cancer is controversial when 3-or-less lymph nodes are metastatic. Apart from local control, survival and toxicity, cost also plays an important role in decision-making.

Methods

A Markov model was designed to assess cost, health outcomes and cost-effectiveness of different radiotherapy techniques for management of PMRT patients. Thirty-nine scenarios were modelled based on type of radiotherapy, laterality, pathologic nodal burden, and dose fractionation. We considered a societal perspective, lifetime horizon and a 3% discount rate. The data on quality of life (QoL) was derived using the cancer database on cost and QoL. Published data on cost of services delivered in India were used.

Findings

Post-mastectomy radiotherapy results in incremental quality adjusted life years (QALYs) that ranged from -0.1 to 0.38 across different scenarios. The change in cost ranged from estimated median savings of USD 62 (95% confidence intervals: -168 to -47) to incurring an incremental cost of USD 728 (650-811) across different levels of nodal burden, breast laterality and dose fractionation. For women with node-negative disease, disease-specific systemic therapy remains to be the preferred strategy. For women with node-positive disease, two-dimensional radiotherapy (2DRT) with hypofractionation is the most cost-effective strategy. However, a CT based planning is preferred when maximum heart distance (MHD) >1cm, irregular chest wall contour and inter-field separation >18cm.

Interpretation

PMRT is cost-effective for all node-positive patients. With similar toxicity and effectiveness profile compared with conventional fractionation, moderate hypofractionation significantly reduces the cost of treatment and should be the standard of care. Conventional techniques for PMRT are cost-effective over newer modalities which provide minimal additional benefit, at high cost.

Funding

The funding to collect primary data for study was provided by Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, wide letter number F. No. T.11011/02/2017-HR/3100291.

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.

"Systematic review and meta-analysis of immediate versus delayed autologous breast reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy adjuvant radiation therapy"

BACKGROUND

Immediate post-mastectomy autologous breast reconstruction in breast cancer patients requiring post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) minimizes the number of operations that patients must undergo and alleviates the psychological impact of living without a breast. However, the safety and impact of radiation on the reconstructed breast remains to be established. This study aimed to compare immediate versus delayed autologous reconstruction in the setting of PMRT to determine the optimal sequencing of reconstruction and adjuvant radiation.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature identified 292 studies meeting criteria for full-text review, 44 of which underwent meta-analysis. This represented data on 1,927 immediate reconstruction (IR) patients and 1,546 delayed reconstruction (DR) patients (3,473 total patients). Early complications included flap loss, fat necrosis, thrombosis, seroma, hematoma, infection, and skin dehiscence. Late complications included fibrosis or contracture, severe asymmetry, hyperpigmentation, and decreased flap volume.

RESULTS

Immediate breast reconstruction did not demonstrate significantly increased complication rates. Reported mean complication rates in IR versus DR groups, respectively, were fat necrosis 14.91% and 8.12% (p = 0.076), flap loss 0.99% and 1.80% (p = 0.295), hematoma 1.91% and 1.14% (p = 0.247), infection 11.66% and 4.68% (p = 0.155), and thrombosis 1.51% and 3.36% (p = 0.150). Seroma rates were significantly lower in the immediate cohort at 2.69% versus 10.57% in the delayed cohort (p = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

Complication rates are comparable between immediate and delayed breast reconstruction in the setting of PMRT. Given the patient benefits incurred by an IR algorithm, immediate autologous breast reconstruction should be considered as a viable treatment option in patients requiring PMRT.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of advanced radiotherapy techniques for post-mastectomy breast cancer patients

Background

Prior cost-effectiveness studies of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) only compared conventional radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy and only considered tumor control. The goal of this study was to perform cost-effectiveness analyses of standard of care (SOC) and advanced PMRT techniques including intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), standard volumetric modulated arc therapy (STD-VMAT), non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT), multiple arc VMAT (MA-VMAT), Tomotherapy (TOMO), mixed beam therapy (MIXED), and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT).

Methods

Using a Markov model, we estimated the cost-effectiveness of various techniques over 15 years. A cohort of women (55-year-old) was simulated in the model, and radiogenic side effects were considered. Transition probabilities, utilities, and costs for each health state were obtained from literature and Medicare data. Model outcomes include quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Results

For the patient cohort, STD-VMAT has an ICER of $32,617/QALY relative to SOC; TOMO is dominated by STD-VMAT; IMRT has an ICER of $19,081/QALY relative to STD-VMAT; NC-VMAT, MA-VMAT, MIXED are dominated by IMRT; IMPT has an ICER of $151,741/QALY relative to IMRT. One-way analysis shows that the probability of cardiac toxicity has the most significant impact on the model outcomes. The probability sensitivity analyses show that all advanced PMRT techniques are more cost-effective than SOC at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000/QALY, while almost none of the advanced techniques is more cost-effective than SOC at a WTP threshold of $50,000/QALY.

Conclusion

Advanced PMRT techniques are more cost-effective for breast cancer patients at a WTP threshold of $100,000/QALY, and IMRT might be a cost-effective option for PMRT patients.

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.

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.

Breast Cancer in Young Women: Health State Utility Impacts by Race/Ethnicity

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about the effect of breast cancers on health-related quality of life among women diagnosed between age 18 and 44 years. The goal of this study is to estimate the effect of breast cancer on health state utility by age at diagnosis (18-44 years versus ≥45 years) and by race/ethnicity.

METHODS

The analytic sample, drawn from the 2009 and 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and analyzed in 2013, included women diagnosed with breast cancer between age 18 and 44 years (n=1,389) and age ≥45 years (n=6,037). Health state utility values were estimated using Healthy Days variables and a published algorithm. Regression analysis was conducted separately by age at diagnosis and race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

The breast cancer health state utility decrement within 1 year from date of diagnosis was larger for women diagnosed at age 18-44 years than for women diagnosed at age ≥45 years (-0.116 vs -0.070, p<0.05). Within the younger age-at-diagnosis group, Hispanic women 2-4 years after diagnosis had the largest health state utility decrement (-0.221, p<0.01), followed by non-Hispanic white women within 1 year of diagnosis (-0.126, p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to report estimates of health state utility values for breast cancer by age at diagnosis and race/ethnicity from a nationwide sample. The results highlight the need for separate quality of life adjustments for women by age at diagnosis and race/ethnicity when conducting cost-effectiveness analysis of breast cancer prevention, detection, and treatment.

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+.

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.

Economic evaluation of using a genetic test to direct breast cancer chemoprevention in white women with a previous breast biopsy

BACKGROUND

Tamoxifen therapy reduces the risk of breast cancer but increases the risk of serious adverse events including endometrial cancer and thromboembolic events.

OBJECTIVES

The cost effectiveness of using a commercially available breast cancer risk assessment test (BREVAGen™) to inform the decision of which women should undergo chemoprevention by tamoxifen was modeled in a simulated population of women who had undergone biopsies but had no diagnosis of cancer.

METHODS

A continuous time, discrete event, mathematical model was used to simulate a population of white women aged 40-69 years, who were at elevated risk for breast cancer because of a history of benign breast biopsy. Women were assessed for clinical risk of breast cancer using the Gail model and for genetic risk using a panel of seven common single nucleotide polymorphisms. We evaluated the cost effectiveness of using genetic risk together with clinical risk, instead of clinical risk alone, to determine eligibility for 5 years of tamoxifen therapy. In addition to breast cancer, the simulation included health states of endometrial cancer, pulmonary embolism, deep-vein thrombosis, stroke, and cataract. Estimates of costs in 2012 US dollars were based on Medicare reimbursement rates reported in the literature and utilities for modeled health states were calculated as an average of utilities reported in the literature. A 50-year time horizon was used to observe lifetime effects including survival benefits.

RESULTS

For those women at intermediate risk of developing breast cancer (1.2-1.66 % 5-year risk), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the combined genetic and clinical risk assessment strategy over the clinical risk assessment-only strategy was US$47,000, US$44,000, and US$65,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, for women aged 40-49, 50-59, and 60-69 years, respectively (assuming a price of US$945 for genetic testing). Results were sensitive to assumptions about patient adherence, utility of life while taking tamoxifen, and cost of genetic testing.

CONCLUSIONS

From the US payer's perspective, the combined genetic and clinical risk assessment strategy may be a moderately cost-effective alternative to using clinical risk alone to guide chemoprevention recommendations for women at intermediate risk of developing breast cancer.

Cost effectiveness of TAC versus FAC in adjuvant treatment of node-positive breast cancer

Background

This economic analysis aimed to determine, from the perspective of a Canadian provincial government payer, the cost-effectiveness of docetaxel (Taxotere: Sanofi–Aventis, Laval, QC) in combination with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (tac) compared with 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (fac) following primary surgery for breast cancer in women with operable, axillary lymph node–positive breast cancer.

Methods

A Markov model looking at two time phases—5-year treatment and long-term follow-up—was constructed. Clinical events included clinical response (based on disease-free survival and overall survival) and rates of febrile neutropenia, stomatitis, diarrhea, and infections. Health states were “no recurrence,” “locoregional recurrence,” “distant recurrence,” and “death.” Costs were based on published sources and are presented in 2006 Canadian dollars. Model inputs included chemotherapy drug acquisition costs, chemotherapy administration costs, relapse and follow-up costs, costs for management of adverse events, and costs for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (g-csf) prophylaxis. A 5% discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes alike. Health utilities were obtained from published sources.

Results

For tac as compared with fac, the incremental cost was $6921 per life-year (ly) gained and $6,848 per quality-adjusted life-year (qaly) gained. The model was robust to changes in input variables (for example, febrile neutropenia rate, utility). When g-csf and antibiotics were given prophylactically before every cycle, the incremental ratios increased to $13,183 and $13,044 respectively.

Conclusions

Compared with fac, tac offered improved response at a higher cost. The cost-effectiveness ratios were low, indicating good economic value in the adjuvant setting of node-positive breast cancer patients.

A simulation model approach to analysis of the business case for eliminating health care disparities

BACKGROUND

Purchasers can play an important role in eliminating racial and ethnic disparities in health care. A need exists to develop a compelling "business case" from the employer perspective to put, and keep, the issue of racial/ethnic disparities in health care on the quality improvement agenda for health plans and providers.

METHODS

To illustrate a method for calculating an employer business case for disparity reduction and to compare the business case in two clinical areas, we conducted analyses of the direct (medical care costs paid by employers) and indirect (absenteeism, productivity) effects of eliminating known racial/ethnic disparities in mammography screening and appropriate medication use for patients with asthma. We used Markov simulation models to estimate the consequences, for defined populations of African-American employees or health plan members, of a 10% increase in HEDIS mammography rates or a 10% increase in appropriate medication use among either adults or children/adolescents with asthma.

RESULTS

The savings per employed African-American woman aged 50-65 associated with a 10% increase in HEDIS mammography rate, from direct medical expenses and indirect costs (absenteeism, productivity) combined, was $50. The findings for asthma were more favorable from an employer point of view at approximately $1,660 per person if raising medication adherence rates in African-American employees or dependents by 10%.

CONCLUSIONS

For the employer business case, both clinical scenarios modeled showed positive results. There is a greater potential financial gain related to eliminating a disparity in asthma medications than there is for eliminating a disparity in mammography rates.

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.

Decision modelling of economic evaluation of intervention programme of breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

Economic appraisal of an intervention is a complex and multivariable problem, with probabilistic issues related not only to clinical outcomes but also to costs and willingness to pay.

METHODS

We provide a comprehensive framework for economic appraisal of a health intervention to prevent beast cancer mortality, involving probabilistic model of costs as well as of aspects of the disease process. The economic appraisal can give a range of probabilities of cost-effectiveness depending on willingness or ability to pay.

RESULTS

We apply the method to the example of polychemotherapy for early breast cancer. Results indicate a 30% probability of cost-effectiveness for a willingness to pay of $ 60,000 per quality-adjusted life-year and around 50% for a threshold of $ 100,000.

CONCLUSION

The comprehensive economic appraisal model is a powerful tool for decision making over a range of economic environments.

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.

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

PURPOSE

Accelerated partial-breast irradiation (PBI) is a new treatment paradigm for patients with early-stage breast cancer. Although PBI may lead to greater local recurrence rates, it may be cost-effective because of better tolerability and lower cost. We aim to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of PBI compared with whole-breast radiation therapy (WBRT) for estrogen receptor-positive postmenopausal women treated for early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We developed a Markov model to describe health states in the 15 years after radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. External beam (EB) and MammoSite (MS) PBI were considered and assumed to be equally effective, but carried different costs. Patients received tamoxifen, but not chemotherapy. Utilities, recurrence risks, and costs were adapted from the literature; the baseline utility for no disease after radiotherapy was set at 0.92. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to model uncertainty in the PBI hazard ratio, recurrence pattern, and patient utilities. Costs (in 2004 US dollars) and quality-adjusted life-years were discounted at 3%/y.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for WBRT compared with EB-PBI was $630,000/quality-adjusted life-year; WBRT strongly dominated MS-PBI. One-way sensitivity analysis found that results were sensitive to PBI hazard ratio, recurrence pattern, baseline recurrence risk, and no evidence of disease PBI utility values. Probabilistic sensitivity showed that EB-PBI was the most cost-effective technique over a wide range of assumptions and societal willingness-to-pay values.

CONCLUSIONS

EB-PBI was the most cost-effective strategy for postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Unless the quality of life after MS-PBI proves to be superior, it is unlikely to be cost-effective.

Ten-year survival and cost following breast cancer recurrence: estimates from SEER-medicare data

OBJECTIVE

A variety of pharmacologic therapies are available or in development for the prevention of breast cancer recurrence. Assessing the value of these treatments is compromised by a paucity of data on the impact of recurrence on economic costs and survival. The purpose of this study was to shed light on these issues.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of linked SEER-Medicare data. All patients in the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry who were diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer during 1991-1993 were identified, and their subsequent Medicare claims were scanned for evidence of further breast cancer events (local or distant recurrence, contralateral breast cancer). Medicare claims were then scanned from the time of the event through 2002 to assess patterns of survival and costs.

RESULTS

We identified 10,798 patients in SEER who were diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer during 1991-1993, including 1833 who subsequently had another breast cancer event (local recurrence, 958; distant recurrence, 622; contralateral breast cancer, 253). Median survival was 37 months and 8 months among patients with local and distant recurrence, respectively; 53% of patients with contralateral breast cancer remained alive after all the data were censored at 97 months. Expected 10-year costs (2004 US$, discounted 3%) attributable to distant recurrence, local recurrence, and contralateral breast cancer were $11,450 (SE 2056), $19,596 (SE 1754), and $19,183 (SE 4131), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer recurrence and contralateral breast cancer lead to substantial increases in costs, amounting to approximately $11,000-19,000 over 10 years depending on type. The impact of these events on survival also varies considerably by type.

Partial breast irradiation versus whole breast radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: a decision analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the quality-adjusted life expectancy between women treated with partial breast irradiation (PBI) vs. whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) for estrogen receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We developed a Markov model to describe health states in the 15 years after radiotherapy for estrogen receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer. Breast cancer recurrences were separated into local recurrences and elsewhere failures. Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) risk was extracted from the Oxford overview, and rates and utilities were adapted from the literature. We studied two cohorts of women (aged 40 and 55 years), both of whom received adjuvant tamoxifen.

RESULTS

Assuming a no evidence of disease (NED)-PBI utility of 0.93, quality-adjusted life expectancy after PBI (and WBRT) was 12.61 (12.57) and 12.10 (12.06) years for 40-year-old and 55-year-old women, respectively. The NED-PBI utility thresholds for preferring PBI over WBRT were 0.923 and 0.921 for 40-year-old and 55-year-old women, respectively, both slightly greater than the NED-WBRT utility. Outcomes were sensitive to the utility of NED-PBI, the PBI hazard ratio for local recurrence, the baseline IBTR risk, and the percentage of IBTRs that were local. Overall the degree of superiority of PBI over WBRT was greater for 55-year-old women than for 40-year-old women.

CONCLUSIONS

For most utility values of the NED-PBI health state, PBI was the preferred treatment modality. This result was highly sensitive to patient preferences and was also dependent on patient age, PBI efficacy, IBTR risk, and the fraction of IBTRs that were local.

An evidence-based estimation of local control and survival benefit of radiotherapy for breast cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Survival benefits from radiotherapy for breast cancer described in randomised trials represent only those patients eligible for trials. We estimated the benefit of radiotherapy as an adjuvant treatment for the entire population of breast cancer patients if evidence-based treatment guidelines were followed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Evidences on 10-year local control and overall survival gain (radiotherapy vs no radiotherapy) were identified from review of literature. The data were incorporated into the optimal radiotherapy utilization tree that we previously reported for all categories of breast cancer patients and overall local control and survival benefits were estimated.

RESULTS

The gains in 10-year local control and overall survival from optimal treatment of all breast cancer patients were 11.1% (95% CI 10.8-11.2%) and 3.1% (95% CI 3.0-3.4%), respectively. The stage-based estimates in local control and survival benefit were: 8% and 0% for Ductal Carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 12% and 2% for stage I-II cancers and 13% and 20% for stage III cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model was able to estimate the contribution of radiotherapy in breast cancer treatment if all patients were treated according to the recommended guidelines. These estimates could be used to benchmark population-based survival reports and to assess the cost-effectiveness of radiotherapy for breast cancer treatment.

Cost Effectiveness of Adjuvant Trastuzumab in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Positive Breast Cancer

Purpose

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 12-month adjuvant trastuzumab therapy in women with high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) –positive early breast cancer.

Methods

A Markov model tracked quarterly patients’ transitions between five health states: disease free, local relapse, disease free after local relapse, metastatic disease, and death. Patients were allowed to incur symptomatic or asymptomatic transient cardiac dysfunction during trastuzumab administration. Probabilities were derived mainly from the combined report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-31 and the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 trials (95% node positive) and a meta-analysis by the Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Costs were estimated from the perspective of the Italian and US health care systems. The analysis was run during a 15-year time horizon. A 3% yearly discount rate was applied to both costs and life-years. Second-order Monte-Carlo and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

Adjuvant trastuzumab increases life expectancy by 1.54 (1.18 discounted) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). At a cost of €675 and $767 per weekly dose in the Italian and US setting, respectively, trastuzumab achieves its clinical benefit at a cost of €14,861 (95% CI, €3,917 to €44,028) and $18,970 (95% CI, $6,014 to $45,621) per QALY saved. The incremental cost effectiveness was higher than €50,000/QALY (or $60,000/QALY) at time horizons shorter than 7.8 years and for patients older than 76 years or with a 10-year risk of relapse lower than 15%. The results confirmed the cost effectiveness when simulating a Herceptin Adjuvant Trial (HERA) -like scenario at multiway sensitivity analysis.

Conclusion

In a long-term horizon, adjuvant trastuzumab is a cost-effective therapy for patients with HER2-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer.

Estimating transitions between symptom severity states over time in schizophrenia: a Bayesian meta-analytic approach

We obtain the posterior predictive distribution of transition probabilities between symptom severity states over time for patients with schizophrenia by (i) employing a Bayesian meta-analysis of published clinical trials and observational studies to estimate the posterior distribution of parameters that guide changes in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores over time and under the influence of various drugs and (ii) by propagating the variability from the posterior distributions of the parameters through a micro-simulation model that is formulated based on schizophrenia progression. Results show detailed differences among haloperidol, risperidone and olanzapine in controlling various levels of severities of positive, negative and joint symptoms over time. For example, risperidone seems best in controlling severe positive symptoms while olanzapine is the worst in that during the first quarter of drug treatment; however, olanzapine seems to be best in controlling severe negative symptoms across all four quarters of treatment while haloperidol is the worst in this regard. These details may further serve to better estimate quality of life of patients and aid in resource utilization decisions in treating schizophrenic patients. In addition, consistent estimation of uncertainty in the time-profile parameters also has important implications for the practice of cost-effectiveness analysis and for future resource allocation policies in schizophrenia treatment.

Adjuvant ovarian suppression versus chemotherapy for premenopausal, hormone-responsive breast cancer: quality of life and efficacy tradeoffs

PURPOSE

Recent clinical trials suggest that adjuvant ovarian suppression may be an equally effective and less toxic alternative to systemic chemotherapy in premenopausal women with hormone-responsive breast cancer. We used a decision-analytic framework to evaluate tradeoffs between efficacy and quality of life in the choice between these treatments.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used a Markov state-transition model to simulate clinical practice in a cohort of 40-year-old premenopausal women with newly diagnosed, hormone-responsive early breast cancer. We assessed three adjuvant treatments: chemotherapy, surgical ovarian suppression, and medical ovarian suppression. Outcomes were recurrence-free, overall, and quality-adjusted survival. Quality-adjusted survival reflected effects of cancer, treatment-related side effects, and menopausal symptoms.

RESULTS

Assuming equal efficacy, ovarian suppression was superior to chemotherapy when the relative utility of chemotherapy side effects compared with ovarian suppression side effects was less than 0.95. Results were sensitive to assumptions about the likelihood, duration and consequences of treatment-induced menopause. Treatment choice was affected by a 7% proportional increase in the efficacy of one therapy relative to the others, independent of other factors.

CONCLUSION

If adjuvant chemotherapy and ovarian suppression have similar efficacy, then there may be a subgroup of women for whom quality-of-life considerations dominate the choice of treatment. However, small differences in the relative efficacy of these therapies have a substantial impact on treatment choice, regardless of side effects and menopausal transitions.

Cost-effectiveness of radiation therapy following conservative surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

PURPOSE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of radiation therapy (RT) in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A Markov model was constructed for a theoretical cohort of 55-year-old women with DCIS over a life-time horizon. Probability estimates for local noninvasive (N-INV), local invasive (INV), and distant recurrences were obtained from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-17. Utilities for eight nonmetastatic health states were collected from both healthy women and DCIS patients. Direct medical (2002 Medicare fee schedule) and nonmedical costs (time and transportation) of RT were ascertained.

RESULTS

For BCS + RT vs. BCS alone, the estimated N-INV and INV rates at 12 years were 9% and 8% vs. 16% and 18%, respectively. The incremental cost of adding RT was 3300 US dollars despite an initial RT cost of 8700 US dollars due to higher local recurrence-related salvage costs incurred with the BCS alone strategy. An increase of 0.09 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) primarily reflected the lower risk of INV with RT, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 36,700 US dollars/QALY. Sensitivity analyses revealed the ICER to be affected by baseline probability of a local recurrence, relative efficacy of RT in preventing INV, negative impact of an INV on quality of life, and cost of initial RT. Cost of salvage BCS + RT and source of utilities (healthy women vs. DCIS patients) influenced the ICER albeit to a lesser degree.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of RT following BCS for patients with DCIS should not be withheld because of concerns regarding its cost-effectiveness.

Determinants of patients' choice of reconstruction with mastectomy for primary breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to measure women's decisions about breast reconstruction (BR) after mastectomy and to assess the factors contributing to their decisions, in a context involving shared decision-making and maximum patient autonomy.

METHODS

Women who were about to undergo mastectomy for primary breast cancer were systematically offered choices concerning BR and time of reconstruction (intervention always covered by the French National Insurance System). Self-administered questionnaires were used prior to the operation.

RESULTS

Among the 181 respondents, 81% opted for BR and 19% for mastectomy alone. In comparison with those who chose mastectomy alone, those opting for BR more frequently recognized the importance of discussing these matters with the surgeon and their partner (adjusted odds ratio [OR(adj)] = 13.45 and 3.59, respectively; P <.05) and realized that their body image was important (OR(adj) = 10.55, P <.01); fears about surgery prevented some of the women from opting for BR (OR(adj) = 0.688, P <.05). Among the women opting for BR, 83% chose immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) and 17% chose delayed breast reconstruction (DBR). The preference for IBR was mainly attributable to the fact that these women had benefited more frequently from doctor-patient discussions (OR(adj) = 3.49, P <.05) but was also attributable to the patients' physical and functional characteristics: they were in a poorer state of health (P <.05). The surgeons predicted their patients' preferences fairly accurately.

CONCLUSIONS

In a context of maximum autonomy, the great majority of the women chose IBR. The patients' choices were explained mainly by their psychosocial characteristics. The indication for BR should be properly discussed between patients and surgeons before mastectomy.

HER-2 testing and trastuzumab therapy for metastatic breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

PURPOSE

Trastuzumab therapy has been shown to benefit metastatic breast cancer patients whose tumors exhibit HER-2 protein overexpression or gene amplification. Several tests of varying accuracy and cost are available to identify candidates for trastuzumab. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of alternative HER-2 testing and trastuzumab treatment strategies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a decision analysis using a state-transition model to simulate clinical practice in a hypothetical cohort of 65-year-old metastatic breast cancer patients. Outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Interventions included testing with the HercepTest (DAKO, Carpinteria, CA) immunohistochemical assay alone, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) alone, and both tests, followed by trastuzumab and chemotherapy for patients with positive test results and chemotherapy alone for patients with negative test results.

RESULTS

In the base case, initial HercepTest with FISH confirmation of all positive results had an ICER of $125,000 per QALY gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness of initial FISH was $145,000 per QALY gained. Other strategies yielded the same or poorer effectiveness at a higher cost, or lower effectiveness at a lower cost, but with a less favorable ICER. These findings persisted under a range of assumptions, and only changes in test characteristics substantially altered results.

CONCLUSION

It is more cost-effective to use FISH alone or as confirmation of all positive HercepTest results, rather than using FISH to confirm only weakly positive results or using HercepTest alone. When multiple tests are available to identify treatment candidates, test characteristics may have a substantial impact on the aggregate costs and effectiveness of treatment.

Cost-effectiveness versus cost-utility analysis of interventions for cancer: does adjusting for health-related quality of life really matter?

OBJECTIVE

The US Public Health Service Panel on Cost-Effectiveness has recommended the use of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) as the best way to estimate outcomes in a cost-effectiveness analysis. We evaluate the importance of this recommendation by assessing whether adjusting for health-related quality of life affects the ultimate resource allocation decision implied by the cost-effectiveness ratio for interventions aimed at cancer prevention and control.

METHODS

We identified 110 interventions in 39 articles for which both cost/life-year and cost/QALY were reported. Interventions were forms of prevention, early detection, or treatment of cancer. We calculated a Spearman correlation to assess the ordinal relationship between cost/life-year and cost/QALY. In addition, we employed various decision thresholds to assess whether the use of cost/life-year would yield different resource allocation decisions than the use of cost/QALY.

RESULTS

The correlation between cost/life-year and cost/QALY is 0.96 (P <.0001). Assuming a US dollars 50000 decision threshold, adjustment for quality of life would affect the implied choice in 5% of cases. With a US dollars 400000 threshold, adjustment for quality of life would affect choice for 2% of interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

For interventions aimed at cancer, the outcome measures of cost/life-year and cost/QALY are highly correlated with one another. Although adjusting for quality of life can make an important difference in the evaluation of alternative approaches to cancer prevention and control, it often does not.

Benefit and projected cost-effectiveness of anastrozole versus tamoxifen as initial adjuvant therapy for patients with early-stage estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Women who have estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease with postmenopausal onset and who receive tamoxifen as standard adjuvant treatment constitute the largest subgroup of patients with breast cancer. Recent data from the ATAC ('Arimidex, Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination') randomized trial indicate that anastrozole significantly reduces breast cancer recurrence rates but does not provide any advantage in terms of survival at 4 years posttreatment. Furthermore, anastrozole and tamoxifen were found to have different toxicity profiles. The goals of the current study were to estimate the disease-free survival (DFS) rates and potential survival benefits associated with anastrozole use and to determine whether the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICE) was low enough to warrant an immediate switch to the use of this agent, as the long-term conclusions of the ATAC trial will not be available for several years.

METHODS

A computer simulation model assessed the outcomes of 64-year-old women with ER-positive breast cancer who subsequently received either anastrozole or tamoxifen for 5 years. Daily recurrence risks, as well as the relative risks associated with various treatment-related events, were calculated using data from the ATAC trial. Study endpoints included breast cancer recurrence-free survival, anticipated survival resulting from an anastrozole-induced decrease in systemic disease recurrence rates, and survival adjusted for quality of life and for hip fracture risk over periods of 4, 12, and 20 years.

RESULTS

After 4 years, the projected DFS benefit associated with anastrozole was 14 days, with an ICE of $167,500 per year. Projected 12 and 20 years into the future, DFS benefits increased to 2.9 months and 5.3 months, respectively. The corresponding benefits in terms of overall survival were 0.9 months and 2.0 months, respectively, with the ICE becoming < $100,000 per life year once the projection horizon exceeded 12 years. The inclusion of quality-of-life weightings for nonfatal outcomes modestly favored anastrozole in the short term; however, if anastrozole use is associated with an increased risk of hip fracture, then the long-term benefit associated with this agent is reduced by approximately 25%.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant anastrozole is projected to result in a substantial improvement in DFS for patients with breast cancer. If this DFS benefit were to ultimately lead to a survival benefit, then the ICE of anastrozole use would be acceptable for patients expected to live longer than 12 years. Decision models are useful for generating realistic projections for stakeholders who are considering competing options that impact survival and quality of life and have associated societal costs.

Postmastectomy radiotherapy in premenopausal Vietnamese and Chinese women with breast cancer treated in an adjuvant hormonal therapy study

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant postmastectomy radiotherapy (RT) decreases the risk of local recurrence of breast cancer and may increase overall survival (OS).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

After mastectomy, 656 premenopausal Vietnamese and Chinese women with clinical Stage II-IIIA breast cancer, in a clinical trial of adjuvant surgical oophorectomy and tamoxifen, were treated with adjuvant RT according to the availability in the institution. The short-term disease recurrence and OS experience of these 656 women were analyzed using univariate and multivariate methods.

RESULTS

The 193 patients who did not receive RT differed from the 463 who did in that they had larger tumors and more frequently Grade 3 tumors. With a median follow-up of 3.6 years, in univariate analysis, RT was associated with improved disease-free survival (DFS) (relative risk 0.66; 95% confidence interval 0.49-0.89; p = 0.007) and OS (relative risk 0.71; 95% confidence interval 0.50-1.00; p = 0.051). In multivariate analysis, the relative risk for DFS and OS associated with RT was 0.78 and 0.94, respectively (p = not significant for both). Kaplan-Meier estimates showed better 5-year DFS (72% vs. 59%; p = 0.006) and OS (78% vs. 70%; p = 0.05) rates with RT.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of detailed CT planning capacity, adjuvant RT for premenopausal Vietnamese women was associated statistically with short-term improvement in DFS and OS in univariate, but not multivariate, analysis.