The cost of treating small cell lung cancer

Economic burden of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer: an assessment of healthcare resource utilization and medical costs

Aim: To quantify the economic burden of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) among patients with and without adjuvant therapy. Methods: All-cause and NSCLC-related healthcare resource utilization and medical costs were assessed among patients with resected stage IB-IIIA NSCLC in the SEER-Medicare database (1 January 2011-31 December 2019), from NSCLC diagnosis to death, end of continuous enrollment, or end of data availability (whichever occurred first). Results: Patients receiving adjuvant therapy had the lowest mean NSCLC-related medical costs (adjuvant [n = 1776]: $3738; neoadjuvant [n = 56]: $5793; both [n = 47]: $4818; surgery alone [n = 3478]: $4892, per-person-per-month), driven by lower NSCLC-related hospitalization rates. Conclusion: Post-surgical management of early-stage NSCLC was associated with high economic burden. Adjuvant therapy was associated with numerically lower medical costs over surgical resection alone.

Development and Validation of txSim: A Model of Advanced Lung Cancer Treatment in Australia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Since 2016, new therapies have transformed the standard of care for lung cancer, creating a need for up-to-date evidence for health economic modelling. We developed a discrete event simulation of advanced lung cancer treatment to provide estimates of survival outcomes and healthcare costs in the Australian setting that can be updated as new therapies are introduced.

METHODS

Treatment for advanced lung cancer was modelled under a clinician-specified treatment algorithm for Australia in 2022. Prevalence of lung cancer subpopulations was extracted from cBioPortal and the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study, a large prospective cohort linked to cancer registrations. All costs were from the health system perspective for the year 2020. Pharmaceutical and molecular diagnostic costs were obtained from public reimbursement fees, while other healthcare costs were obtained from health system costs in the 45 and Up Study. Treatment efficacy was obtained from clinical trials and observational study data. Costs and survival were modelled over a 10-year horizon. Uncertainty intervals were generated with probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Overall survival predictions were validated against real-world studies.

RESULTS

Under the 2022 treatment algorithm, estimated mean survival and costs for advanced lung cancer 10 years post-diagnosis were 16.4 months (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 14.7-18.1) and AU$116,069 (95% UI: $107,378-$124,933). Survival and costs were higher assuming optimal treatment utilisation rates (20.5 months, 95% UI: 19.1-22.5; $154,299, 95% UI: $146,499-$161,591). The model performed well in validation, with good agreement between predicted and observed survival in real-world studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival improvements for advanced lung cancer have been accompanied by growing treatment costs. The estimates reported here can be used for budget planning and economic evaluations of interventions across the spectrum of cancer control.

Comparison of demographics, treatment patterns, health care utilization, and costs among elderly patients with extensive-stage small cell and metastatic non-small cell lung cancers

Background

Limited data exist regarding real-world treatment patterns, resource utilization, and costs of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (esSCLC) among elderly patients in the United States. While abundant data are available on treatment patterns in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), to our knowledge no data exist comparing costs and resource use between patients with esSCLC or mNSCLC.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed administrative claims data (2000–2008) of patients aged ≥65 years from the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Patients were selected on the basis of having newly diagnosed esSCLC (n=5,855) or mNSCLC (n=24,090) during 1/1/2000-12/31/2005, and were required to have received cancer-directed therapy. Survival and other measures were compared between esSCLC and mNSCLC patients using Kaplan-Meier log-rank and univariate chi-square and t-tests. Study measures were followed from first diagnosis date of either esSCLC or mNSCLC until the earlier of death or end of the database.

Results

Survival between the cohorts did not differ significantly: mean of 10.4 months for esSCLC patients versus 11.1 months for mNSCLC; median survival was 7.4 months versus 5.9 months. A higher percentage of mNSCLC patients (vs. esSCLC) received radiation therapy (75.6% vs. 65.4%; P < 0.001) and surgery (13.6% vs. 7.8%; P < 0.001) during the metastatic disease period. Conversely, a higher percentage of esSCLC patients than mNSCLC patients received chemotherapy (85.5% vs. 60.3%; P < 0.001), red blood-cell transfusion (20.7% vs. 10.9%; P < 0.001), platelet transfusion (5.6% vs. 1.8%; P < 0.001), and growth-factor support (59.0% vs. 39.5%; P < 0.001). esSCLC patients incurred higher lifetime disease-related costs ($44,167 vs. $37,932; P < 0.001) and all-cause costs ($70,549 vs. $67,176; P < 0.001) than mNSCLC patients.

Conclusions

Lifetime total and disease-related costs per patient were high. Increased use of chemotherapy, supportive care therapies (including growth factors), and disease-related hospitalizations were observed in esSCLC patients as compared with mNSCLC patients. Disease-related and all-cause costs for esSCLC also exceeded those of mNSCLC, except for hospice and skilled nursing services. Survival and per-patient costs for both groups underscore the unmet medical need for more effective therapies in patients with esSCLC or mNSCLC.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-014-0555-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST): patient-reported outcome or mathematical model? A systematic review in cancer

OBJECTIVE

Successful cancer treatment is defined as an increase in overall survival and/or progression-free survival. Despite their importance, these metrics omit patient quality of life. Quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) was developed to adjust survival gained, accounting for quality of life. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the methods reported in cancer literature to determine Q-TWiST values and how these are currently translated to the clinic.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used to conduct a systematic review of studies indexed on MEDLINE and Web of Science through April 2013. Cancer studies that measured Q-TWiST either as a primary outcome or retrospectively and determined utility coefficients from a patient population were identified, and their methods reviewed to determine how the utility coefficient was calculated. Additionally, other relevant factors such as definitions of health states and significant findings were collected and summarized.

RESULTS

Out of 284 studies, 11 were identified that calculated patient-defined utility coefficients. Several methods to determine utility coefficients were reported, and multiple definitions of health state toxicity were applied. Of these studies, seven reported significant differences (p < 0.05) in quality-adjusted survival. No studies, however, directly discussed the clinical relevance of their findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, Q-TWiST is utilized as a mathematical theory rather than a clinical tool. Standardization of terminology plus reliability and validity testing of determining both utility coefficients and time frame definitions must be performed before Q-TWiST can become clinically useful to physicians and patients alike for making treatment decisions.

Cost analysis of lung cancer management in South Western Sydney

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in Western nations, and associated health-care costs are escalating. The aim of this study was to describe the current pattern of resource use and direct medical costs associated in managing lung cancer in South Western Sydney, Australia.

METHODS

All new cases of primary lung carcinoma discussed at the Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre (CTC) Lung Cancer Multidisciplinary Team meeting or seen at CTC between 1 December 2005 and 21 December 2006 were reviewed. Staging investigations, hospitalisation, treatment and follow-up investigations were documented from first consultation to last follow-up (31 October 2008 or death). Cost estimates were based on the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule and reported in Australian dollars. Infrastructure, staff and non-medical costs were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 210 patients, median age 68.2 years (range 39-90) with median follow-up of 16.6 months. The pathology and stage distribution were: 3.8% limited stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC), 10.0% extensive stage SCLC, 13.4% stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 28.5% stage III NSCLC and 44.3% stage IV NSCLC. The estimated total cost for managing this patient cohort was A$2.91 million. The cost components were: staging investigations (10.1%), treatment 41.2% (2.8% surgery, 15.8% radiotherapy and 22.6% chemotherapy), hospitalisation (43.7%) and follow-up investigations (5%). The median costs for managing NSCLC and SCLC subgroups were A$10,675 (range A$669-612,789) and A$14,799 (range A$908-31,057), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Hospitalisation and cancer treatment, particularly chemotherapy, accounted for the major components of direct medical costs in the management of lung cancer.

A systematic review of PET and PET/CT in oncology: a way to personalize cancer treatment in a cost-effective manner?

BACKGROUND

A number of diagnostic tests are required for the detection and management of cancer. Most imaging modalities such as computerized tomography (CT) are anatomical. However, positron emission tomography (PET) is a functional diagnostic imaging technique using compounds labelled with positron-emitting radioisotopes to measure cell metabolism. It has been a useful tool in studying soft tissues such as the brain, cardiovascular system, and cancer. The aim of this systematic review is to critically summarize the health economic evidence of oncologic PET in the literature.

METHODS

Eight electronic databases were searched from 2005 until February 2010 to identify economic evaluation studies not included in previous Health Technology Assessment (HTA) reports. Only full health economic evaluations in English, French, or German were considered for inclusion. Economic evaluations were appraised using published quality criteria for assessing the quality of decision-analytic models. Given the variety of methods used in the health economic evaluations, the economic evidence has been summarized in qualitative form.

RESULTS

From this new search, 14 publications were identified that met the inclusion criteria. All publications were decision-analytic models and evaluated PET using Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 (FDG-PET). Eight publications were cost-effectiveness analyses; six were cost-utility analyses. The studies were from Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Italy, Taiwan, Japan, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In the base case analyses of these studies, cost-effectiveness results ranged from dominated to dominant. The methodology of the economic evaluations was of varying quality. Cost-effectiveness was primarily influenced by the cost of PET, the specificity of PET, and the risk of malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Owing to improved care and less exposure to ineffective treatments, personalized medicine using PET may be cost-effective. However, the strongest evidence for the cost-effectiveness of PET is still in the staging of non-small cell lung cancer. Management decisions relating to the assessment of treatment response or radiotherapy treatment planning require further research to show the impact of PET on patient management and its cost-effectiveness. Because of the potential for increased patient throughput and the possible greater accuracy, the cost-effectiveness of PET/CT may be superior to that of PET. Only four studies of the cost-effectiveness of PET/CT were found in this review, and this is clearly an area for future research.

The cost of lung cancer in Alberta

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality. In addition, lung cancer has a significant economic impact on society.

OBJECTIVE

To present an economic analysis of the actual care costs of lung cancer which will allow comparison with, and verification of, cost estimates that were developed through modelling and opinion.

METHODS

A chart review was conducted of incident cases (circa 1998) of primary bronchogenic lung cancer. Cases were censored at two years from the date of diagnosis. Relevant clinical and health utilization data were collected. Health utilization data included hospital and institutional outpatient (ie, ambulatory clinic) costs. Cost estimates were derived for over 200 specific health services. The present analysis was performed from the economic perspective of the health care institution.

RESULTS

A total of 13,389 health service events were captured with an estimated total cost of $8.4 million. Laboratory tests, diagnostic imaging and ambulatory visits constituted 86% of the service events while patient admissions and therapy constituted 76% of the costs. The vast majority of overall costs occurred just before, or within, three months of diagnosis. The median nonsmall cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer case costs were $10,928 (range $9,234 to $11,047) and $15,350 (range $13,033 to $21,436), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results agree with the literature that the majority of lung cancer case costs are realized around the date of diagnosis (ie, early phase). The present study illustrates Canadian health care system lung cancer case costs based on actual care received versus hypothetical care algorithms.

The Quit Benefits Model: a Markov model for assessing the health benefits and health care cost savings of quitting smoking

Background

In response to the lack of comprehensive information about the health and economic benefits of quitting smoking for Australians, we developed the Quit Benefits Model (QBM).

Methods

The QBM is a Markov model, programmed in TreeAge, that assesses the consequences of quitting in terms of cases avoided of the four most common smoking-associated diseases, deaths avoided, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and health care costs saved (in Australian dollars, A$). Quitting outcomes can be assessed for males and females in 14 five year age-groups from 15–19 to 80–84 years.

Exponential models, based on data from large case-control and cohort studies, were developed to estimate the decline over time after quitting in the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and death. Australian data for the year 2001 were sourced for disease incidence and mortality and health care costs. Utility of life estimates were sourced from an international registry and a meta analysis.

In this paper, outcomes are reported for simulated subjects followed up for ten years after quitting smoking. Life-years, QALYs and costs were estimated with 0%, 3% and 5% per annum discount rates. Summary results are presented for a group of 1,000 simulated quitters chosen at random from the Australian population of smokers aged between 15 and 74.

Results

For every 1,000 males chosen at random from the reference population who quit smoking, there is a an average saving in the first ten years following quitting of A$408,000 in health care costs associated with AMI, COPD, lung cancer and stroke, and a corresponding saving of A$328,000 for every 1,000 female quitters. The average saving per 1,000 random quitters is A$373,000. Overall 40 of these quitters will be spared a diagnosis of AMI, COPD, lung cancer and stroke in the first ten years following quitting, with an estimated saving of 47 life-years and 75 QALYs. Sensitivity analyses indicated that QBM predictions were robust to variations of ± 10% in parameter estimates.

Conclusion

The QBM can answer many of the questions posed by Australian policy-makers and health program funders about the benefits of quitting, and is a useful tool to evaluate tobacco control programs. It can easily be re-programmed with updated information or a set of epidemiologic data from another country.

Pharmacoeconomics of Systemic Therapies for Lung Cancer

The purpose of this article is to review the economics of systemic therapies for the treatment of lung cancer. Lung cancer treatment is moderately expensive. The overall cost to society is significant given its high incidence. Most analyses in patients with small cell lung cancer focus on supportive care measures. The economics of chemotherapy in patients with advanced small cell lung cancer, as assessed in one study, shows alternating chemotherapy to be cost effective. Numerous economic analyses of chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been completed using varying methodologies in a number of countries. In patients with advanced NSCLC, third generation chemotherapy in the first-line setting can be administered within reasonable incremental cost effectiveness. Single-agent docetaxel chemotherapy in the second-line setting has also been shown to fall within a reasonable cost-effective range. Based on this review, systemic therapies for lung cancer are, for the most part, cost effective. Information on the cost-utility of systemic therapies is more limited. In a population of cancer patients with poor prognosis, the inclusion of quality indicators in the calculation of costs (i.e. cost-utility analyses) will be of great importance to refine our understanding of costs and benefits using a more global approach. Future economic analyses of adjuvant chemotherapy and novel targeted therapies will be of great interest.

The economic burden of lung cancer and the associated costs of treatment failure in the United States

The economic burden of lung cancer was examined with a retrospective case-control cohort study on a database containing inpatient, outpatient and drug claims for employees, dependents and retirees of multiple large US employers with wide geographic distribution. Patients were followed for maximum of 2 years from first cancer diagnosis until death, health benefits dis-enrollment or study end (31 December 2000). Compared with controls (subjects without any cancer), patients with lung cancer (n = 2040) had greater health care service utilization and costs for hospitalization, emergency room visits, outpatient office visits, radiology procedures, laboratory procedures and pharmacy-dispensed drugs (all P < 0.05). Regression-adjusted mean monthly total costs were US dollar 6520 for patients versus US dollar 339 for controls (P < 0.0001), and overall costs across the study period (from diagnosis to death or maximum of 2 years) were US dollar 45,897 for patients and US dollar 2907 for controls (P < 0.0001). The main cost drivers were hospitalization (49.0% of costs) and outpatient office visits (35.2% of costs). Monthly initial treatment phase costs (US dollar 11,496 per patient) were higher than costs during the secondary treatment phase (US dollar 3733) or terminal care phase (US dollar 9399). Failure of initial treatment was associated with markedly increased costs. Compared with patients requiring only initial treatment, patients experiencing treatment failure accrued an additional US dollar 10,370 per month in initial treatment phase costs and US dollar 8779 more per month after starting the secondary and/or terminal care phase. Over the course of the study period, these patients had total costs of US dollar 120,650, compared with US dollar 45,953 for those receiving initial treatment only. Thus, the incremental costs associated with treatment failure were US dollar 19,149 per month and US dollar 74,697 across the study period. Other types of clinical and epidemiological analysis are needed to identify risks for treatment failure. The economic burden of lung cancer on the US health care system is significant and increased prevention, new therapies or adjuvant chemotherapy may reduce both resource use and healthcare costs. New strategies for lung cancer that reduce hospitalizations and/or prevent or delay treatment failure could offset some of the economic burden associated with the disease.

Time without symptoms and toxicity (TWIST) analysis of adjuvant radiation therapy for endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Postoperative radiotherapy in endometrial cancer reduces the risk of local relapse but is also associated with substantial acute and late reactions. The aim of our study was to evaluate time without tumor symptoms and toxicity (TWIST) in a consecutive series of 317 endometrial cancer patients administered postoperative irradiation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Both low-dose rate brachytherapy (BRT) and external beam irradiation (EBRT) were applied in 247 patients (78%), only BRT--in 49 (15%) and only EBRT--in 21 patients (7%). Median follow-up was 7.3 years (range, 4-21 years). TWIST analysis based on actuarial freedom from recurrent disease and from late radiotherapy effects was performed with the use of Kaplan-Meier method. The impact of patient- and treatment-related factors on TWIST was assessed with uni- and multivariate tests.

RESULTS

Five-year overall survival was 78%, and five-year disease free survival--75%. Recurrence occurred in 70 patients (22%), of whom in 11 (3.5%)--exclusively in the pelvis. Acute and late reactions of any grade occurred in 268 (85%) and 158 patients (51%), respectively. Late bowel effects of any grade were observed in 41% of patients. Severe late effects occurred in 35 patients (11%). Actuarial probability of two- and five-year survival free of disease and severe (grades 3 or 4) late effects (TWIST) was 84% and 71%, respectively (median TWIST, 16.2 years). When all-grade late effects were considered, two- and five-year TWIST probability was 50 and 30%, respectively, and median TWIST was only 2.0 years. When both acute and late reactions were taken into account, median TWIST was 22 months. In unifactorial test, higher age ( P = 0.013) FIGO stage ( P < 0.001) total radiotherapy dose ( P < 0.001) normalized total dose based on linear-quadratic model ( P = 0.001) EBRT fraction dose ( P < 0.001) and use of cesium BRT ( P = 0.042) were correlated with shorter TWIST. In multifactorial analysis, higher age ( P = 0.001) FIGO stage ( P = 0.001) and total radiotherapy dose ( P < 0.001) were independent factors correlated with shorter TWIST.

CONCLUSIONS

Endometrial cancer patients treated with postoperative irradiation have a long time interval without relapse and severe late toxicity. However, when any late normal tissue injury is considered, the median time without relapse and late toxicity is significantly shorter. The impact of mild late radiotherapy complications on the quality of life should be further investigated. TWIST calculation should be attempted in future prospective studies evaluating the role of postoperative radiotherapy.

Management and costs of treating lung cancer patients in a university hospital

BACKGROUND

New diagnostic tools and emerging medications have significantly changed the existing medical treatment options for lung cancer over the last 5 years. However, the increase in healthcare costs in all developed societies has put the more economical treatments on centre stage.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the patterns and costs of lung cancer management at a Swiss University hospital at which there is a focus on interdisciplinary treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients encountered during 1998 at the University Hospital of Zurich (USZ) with any diagnosis of lung cancer were selected for this retrospective study. Medical and sociodemographic data were collected by medical chart review for a period beginning with the first contact and ending with the last follow-up examination up to 30 months afterwards. Costs were calculated by assessing all resources used by each patient, multiplied by a uniform average cost factor. Results are in euros at 1999 prices.

RESULTS

The sample included 118 patients (72% male) with a mean age of 64.2 years (SD 9.8, range 34-85 years) and a mean smoking history of 45 pack-years (SD 31.8, range 0-13 pack-years). Eighty-nine percent of all patients showed histology of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), whereas 11% showed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Of the NSCLC patients, 27% were classified as stage I, 14% as stage II, 19% as stage IIIA, 11% as stage IIIB and 26% as stage IV disease. The overall survival rate after 1 year was 55% and after 2 years was 29%. Gender and health insurance status were not associated with overall survival. The median length of hospitalisation during the first year of treatment was 14 days (range 0-112 days). For the entire patient sample, the mean cost per patient was 19,408 euros (median 14,691 euros, range 1821-80,020 euros), 71% of which was due to the hospitalisation costs. The mean cost per NSCLC patient was 19,212 euros (median 14,511 euros, range 1821-80,020 euros) and for SCLC patients it was 20,992 euros (median 15,367 euros, range 5282-51,840 euros).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study attempting to estimate the hospital cost of treatment for lung cancer patients in Switzerland and central Europe. The major part of the total cost was due to hospitalisation costs. Patients with advanced stages of lung cancer show the highest cost, mainly due to the costs of chemotherapy. We found that the distribution of total cost is asymmetric: a small number of patients with an excessively long hospital stay cause very high costs.

Prophylactic cranial irradiation revisited: cost-effectiveness and quality of life in small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate the therapeutic usefulness and cost-effectiveness of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) who had achieved a complete remission.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was undertaken of all patients diagnosed in Saskatchewan with SCLC between 1987 and 1998 inclusive. Patients who achieved a complete remission were divided into two groups, depending on whether they underwent PCI (PCI+ and PCI-, respectively). The quality-of-life-adjusted survival was estimated by the Q-TWiST method (quality time without symptoms and toxicity). The mean incremental costs per month of incremental OS were calculated in a cost-effectiveness analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 98 complete remission patients, the median OS for PCI+ and PCI- patients was 20.0 and 19.0 months, respectively (p > 0.05, nonsignificant). The median disease-free survival was 14.7 and 10.0 months, respectively (p < 0.05). The difference in the mean Q-TWiST survival was significant (p < 0.01). The mean marginal cost was $18,834/PCI+ patient and $17,885/PCI- patient (p > 0.05, nonsignificant). The cost-effectiveness ratio was $70/mo of incremental OS if u(tox) and u(rel) (the utility coefficients to reflect the value of time in health states of toxicity and relapse) were assumed to be 1.0.

CONCLUSION

PCI is a cost-effective treatment that improves the quality-of-life-adjusted survival for patients with a complete remission of SCLC.

Treatment pathways, resource use and costs in the management of small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) represents about 20% of primary lung tumours and the costs associated with the management of SCLC can be significant. The main objective of this study was to obtain information on current patterns of care and associated resource use and costs for patients with SCLC from initial diagnosis and treatment phase, throughout disease progression and terminal care.

METHODS

A 4 year retrospective patient chart analysis (1994-7) was conducted on a consecutive series of 109 patients diagnosed with SCLC in two Newcastle hospitals. For this consecutive series of patients all details about care received including tests and procedures, treatment, and medication from diagnosis till death were recorded. Pathways of care and forms were designed to enable resource use to be captured for different disease phases. Unit costs were determined from a variety of sources including the Newcastle Hospitals NHS Trust Finance Department and the British National Formulary.

RESULTS

The average total cost per patient calculated for the full cohort of 109 patients was pound 11,556. Initial treatment was the most resource use intensive constituting 48.2% of the total cost. The major cost element throughout all disease phases was hospitalisation. Twenty eight percent of the total costs of care occur after recurrence of the disease until death, of which 73% are generated by terminal care.

CONCLUSION

The results of this retrospective medical chart analysis show that the costs of care of SCLC are considerable, although the variability between patients in terms of the type and quantity of resource use is very high. Analyses such as this provide a useful insight into resources used in actual clinical practice.

Cost effectiveness analysis of radon remediation programmes

The economic implications of regulations governing radon gas level identification and remediation in buildings are poorly understood, and attempts to address these issues have been criticised for lack of comparability. It is imperative therefore that a general model for the economic evaluation of radon remediation programmes is adopted to ensure comparability between studies and settings and to increase the usefulness of the results to decision makers. This paper presents general guidelines for the use of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) as an economic appraisal tool in the evaluation of radon reduction and prevention programmes. The data requirements for a CEA of radon remediation programmes concern both costs and outcomes. These components are discussed with respect to: programme objectives, comparator choice, perspective, time horizon, discounting, uncertainty, and final ratios. Adhering to clear guidelines concerning these aspects of evaluations will facilitate meaningful evaluation of radon remediation programmes. Finally, by evaluating the radon remediation programmes using methods applied to other health interventions (such as lung cancer prevention interventions), comparisons using the same metric can be made across policy areas.

Physician resource utilization in radiation oncology: a model based on management of carcinoma of the prostate

PURPOSE

To develop a methodology to estimate the comparative cost of physician time in treating patients with localized prostate cancer, using as an example two-dimensional (2D) vs. three-dimensional (3D) conformal irradiation techniques, and to illustrate how current cost-accounting techniques can be used to quantify the cost of physician time and effort of any treatment.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Activity-based costing, a recent innovation in accounting, widely recommended for estimating and managing the costs of specific activities, was used to derive physician resource utilization costs (actual cost of the physician services and related support services consumed).

RESULTS

Patients treated with 3D conformal irradiation consume about 50% more physician time than patients receiving 2D conventional radiation therapy. The average professional reimbursement for the 3D conformal irradiation is only about 26% more than for the 2D treatment. Substantial variations in cost are found depending on the total available physician working hours. In an academic institution, a physician working 40 hours a week would have to spend an average of about 60% of available time on clinical services to break even on a 2D treatment process and over 74% of available time on clinical work to break even on a 3D treatment process. The same physician working 50 hours a week would have to spend an average of about 48% of available time on 2D clinical services and about 60% of available time on 3D clinical work to break even. Current Medicare reimbursement for 3D treatment falls short of actual costs, even if physicians work 100% of a 50-hour week. Medicare reimbursement for 2D barely allows the department to break even for 2D treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Costs based on estimates of resource use can be substantially under- or overestimated. A consistent language (method) is needed to obtain and describe the costs of radiation therapy. The methodology described here can help practitioners and researchers more accurately interpret actual cost information. Future use of such cost-estimation methodologies could provide consistent and comparable costs for negotiations with health care providers and help assess different treatment strategies.

Economic analyses in health care: an introduction to the methodology with an emphasis on radiation therapy

Payers are increasingly interested in knowing whether they are receiving value for the dollars they spend on health care. Because economic analysis will be used as a means of evaluating radiation therapy, it is important that radiation oncologists understand the basic methodology employed in such analyses. This review article describes the four basic types of economic analyses: cost minimization, cost effectiveness, cost utility, and cost benefit. Specification of alternative therapies, choice of perspective of the analysis, measurements of costs and benefits, and the role of discounting and sensitivity analyses are discussed. Published economic analyses that pertain directly to treatment with radiation therapy are reviewed. Finally, we close with a brief discussion of the potential areas for future economic outcomes research in radiation oncology.