Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting.

ABSTRACT: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presentation is heterogeneous necessitating a variety of therapeutic interventions with varying efficacies and associated prognoses. Poor prognostic patients often undergo non-curative palliative interventions including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), sorafenib, chemotherapy, or purely supportive care. The decision to pursue one of many palliative interventions for HCC is complex and an economic evaluation comparing these interventions has not been done. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of non-curative palliative treatment strategies such as TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, sorafenib alone, and non-sorafenib chemotherapy compared with no treatment or best supportive care (BSC) among patients diagnosed with HCC between 2007 and 2010 in a Canadian setting. Using person-level data, we estimated effectiveness in life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) along with total health care costs (2013 US dollars) from the health care payer's perspective (3% annual discount). A net benefit regression approach accounting for baseline covariates with propensity score adjustment was used to calculate incremental net benefit to generate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and uncertainty measures. Among 1,172 identified patients diagnosed with HCC, 4.5%, 7.9%, and 5.6%, received TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, sorafenib, and non-sorafenib chemotherapy clone, respectively. Compared with no treatment or BSC (81.9%), ICER estimates for TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib was $6,665/QALY (additional QALY: 0.47, additional cost: $3,120; 95% CI: -$18,800-$34,500/QALY). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve demonstrated that if the relevant threshold was $50,000/QALY, TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, non-sorafenib chemotherapy, and sorafenib alone, would have a cost-effectiveness probability of 99.7%, 46.6%, and 5.5%, respectively. Covariates associated with the incremental net benefit of treatments are age, sex, comorbidity, and cancer stage. Findings suggest that TACE with or without sorafenib is currently the most cost-effective active non-curative palliative treatment approach to HCC. Further research into new combination treatment strategies that afford the best tumor response is needed.

SUBMITTER: Thein HH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5634563 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting.

Thein Hla-Hla HH Qiao Yao Y Zaheen Ahmad A Jembere Nathaniel N Sapisochin Gonzalo G Chan Kelvin K W KKW Yoshida Eric M EM Earle Craig C CC

PloS one 20171010 10

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presentation is heterogeneous necessitating a variety of therapeutic interventions with varying efficacies and associated prognoses. Poor prognostic patients often undergo non-curative palliative interventions including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), sorafenib, chemotherapy, or purely supportive care. The decision to pursue one of many palliative interventions for HCC is complex and an economic evaluation comparing these interventions has not been done. Th ...[more]

PMID: 29016627

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are potential candidates for curative treatments such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA), surgical resection (SR), or liver transplantation (LT), which have demonstrated a significant survival benefit. We aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of curative and combination treatment strategies among patients diagnosed with HCC during 2002-2010. This study used Ontario Cancer Registry-linked administrative data to estimate effectiveness and costs (2013 USD) of the treatment strategies from the healthcare payer's perspective. Multiple imputation by logistic regression was used to handle missing data. A net benefit regression approach of baseline important covariates and propensity score adjustment were used to calculate incremental net benefit to generate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and uncertainty measures. Among 2,222 patients diagnosed with HCC, 10.5%, 14.1%, and 10.3% received RFA, SR, and LT monotherapy, respectively; 0.5-3.1% dual treatments; and 0.5% triple treatments. Compared with no treatment (53.2%), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) + RFA (average $2,465, 95% CI: -$20,000-$36,600/quality-adjusted life years [QALY]) or RFA monotherapy ($15,553, 95% CI: $3,500-$28,500/QALY) appears to be the most cost-effective modality with lowest ICER value. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed that if the relevant threshold was $50,000/QALY, RFA monotherapy and TACE+ RFA would have a cost-effectiveness probability of 100%. Strategies using LT delivered the most additional QALYs and became cost-effective at a threshold of $77,000/QALY. Our findings found that TACE+ RFA dual treatment or RFA monotherapy appears to be the most cost-effective curative treatment for patients with potential early stage of HCC in Ontario. These findings highlight the importance of identifying and measuring differential benefits, costs, and cost-effectiveness of alternative HCC curative treatments in order to evaluate whether they are providing good value for money in the real world.

Project description:Abstract Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide and accounts for 90% of all primary liver cancers. Chronic inflammation is the hallmark across most prevalent etiologies among which HBV is the leading cause worldwide (33%), followed by alcohol (30%), HCV (21%), other factors like non-alcoholic steatohepatitis linked to insulin resistance/metabolic syndrome, and obesity associated inflammation (16%). Deregulation of the tightly controlled immunological network leads to liver disease, including chronic infection, autoimmunity, and tumor development. While inflammation drives oncogenesis in the liver, HCC also recruits ICOS+ FOXP3+ Tregs and MDSCs and upregulates immune checkpoints to induce a state of immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment. As such, research is focused on targeting and modulating the immune system to treat HCC. The Checkmate 040 and Keynote 224 studies established the role of immunotherapy in the treatment of patients with HCC. In Phase I and II trials, nivolumab and pembrolizumab demonstrated durable response rates of 15–20% and were subsequently approved as second-line agents after sorafenib. Due to the success of the IMbrave 150 and HIMALAYA trials, which examined the combination of atezolizumab/bevacizumab and tremelimumab/durvalumab, respectively, the FDA approved these regimens as first-time treatment options for patients with advanced HCC. The encouraging results of immunotherapy in the management of HCC has led researchers to evaluate if combination with locoregional therapies may result in a synergistic effect. Real-world studies represent an invaluable tool to assess and verify the applicability of clinical trials in the bedside setting with a more varied patient population. We herein review current real-life use of ICIs in the management of HCC and highlight some of the ongoing clinical trials that are expected to change current recommended first-line treatment in the near future.

Project description:ObjectiveKnowledge about determinants of participation in lifestyle interventions in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, particularly with palliative intent, remains poor. The objective of the present study was to identify determinants of participating in a 12 month individualized, comprehensive lifestyle intervention, focusing on diet, physical activity, mental stress and smoking cessation, in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with curative or palliative intent. The secondary objective was to identify participation determinants 4 months into the study.MethodsNewly diagnosed cancer patients starting chemotherapy at the cancer center in Kristiansand/Norway (during a 16 month inclusion period) were screened. Demographic and medical data (age, sex, body mass index, education level, marital status, smoking status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG), diagnosis, tumor stage and treatment intention) was analyzed for screened patients.Results100 of 161 invited patients participated. There were more females (69 vs. 48%; P = 0.004), breast cancer patients (46 vs. 25%; P = 0.007), non-smokers (87 vs. 74%; P = 0.041), younger (mean age 60 vs. 67 yrs; P < 0.001) and fitter (82 vs. 64% with EGOC 0; P = 0.036) participants vs. non-participants included. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, age (Odds Ratio 0.94, 95% Confidence Interval 0.91, 0.97) and smoking (0.42, 0.18, 0.99) were negatively associated with participation. After 4 months, 63 participants were still participating. Cancer type, smoking and age increased the probability of dropping out. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that age was the only significant determinant of 4 month participation (0.95, 0.91, 0.99). Patients aged >70 years were less likely to participate at baseline and 4 months.ConclusionIndividualized lifestyle interventions in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy appear to facilitate a high participation rate that declines with increasing age; both during the enrollment process and completing the intervention. Neither oncologic nor socioeconomic variables deterred participation.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting.

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets