Dataset Information

Cost Analysis of PET/CT Versus CT as Surveillance for Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Definitive Radiation Therapy.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:A previous study showed that use of positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) for surveillance after treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) does not yield a detection or survival benefit over the use of chest CT. However, PET/CT remains a common method of follow-up imaging. Here we estimated and compared the costs of PET/CT versus CT for surveillance of patients with stage III NSCLC and identified patient and provider demographic characteristics associated with preference for use of PET/CT. PATIENTS AND METHODS:We reviewed 178 patients with stage III NSCLC who had received ? 1 PET/CT scan within 6 months of completing radiotherapy (n = 89) or had received CT after radiotherapy (n = 89) from 2000 to 2011. Costs were measured according to Medicare payments converted from institutional billing records. Total and imaging costs were analyzed at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after the end of treatment. Patient and provider demographic characteristics were also evaluated for potential associations with PET/CT use. RESULTS:Total costs in the PET/CT group were higher during the first 18 months after treatment (P = .002 at 6 months, P = .019 at 12 months, and P = .018 at 18 months) but was marginally significant (P = .05) at 24 months. In univariate analysis of demographic variables, patients who lived in a state different from the treatment center might have been more likely to receive PET/CT (odds ratio [OR], 1.76; P = .051). In multivariate analysis, patients treated in 2007 to 2010 (OR, 29.9; P < .001) or 2003 to 2006 (OR, 11.6; P = .002) were more likely to receive PET/CT than patients treated in 1999 to 2002. In addition, radiation oncologists with > 10 years of experience were more likely to use PET/CT than those with less experience, although this result might be confounded by the small number of providers. CONCLUSION:Use of PET/CT was associated with higher costs for 18 months after treatment, but the difference was at the borderline of statistical significance at 24 months.

SUBMITTER: Kim CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6463892 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost Analysis of PET/CT Versus CT as Surveillance for Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Definitive Radiation Therapy.

Kim Charissa R CR Kim Bumyang B Ning Matthew S MS Reddy Jay P JP Liao Zhongxing Z Tang Chad C Welsh James W JW Mott Frank E FE Shih Ya-Chen Tina YT Gomez Daniel R DR

Clinical lung cancer 20180317 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>A previous study showed that use of positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) for surveillance after treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) does not yield a detection or survival benefit over the use of chest CT. However, PET/CT remains a common method of follow-up imaging. Here we estimated and compared the costs of PET/CT versus CT for surveillance of patients with stage III NSCLC and identified patient and provider demographic characteristics as ...[more]

PMID: 29685701

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose/Objective(s): The aim of this follow-up analysis of the ESPATUE phase-3 trial was to explore the prognostic value of post-induction chemotherapy PET metrics in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were assigned to receive definitive chemoradiotherapy. Materials/Methods: All eligible patients stage IIIA (cN2) and stage IIIB of the trial received induction chemotherapy consisting of 3 cycles of cisplatin/paclitaxel and chemoradiotherapy up to 45 Gy/1.5 Gy per fraction twice-a-day, followed by a radiation-boost with 2 Gy once per day with concurrent cisplatin/vinorelbine. The protocol definition prescribed a total dose of 65-71 Gy. 18F-FDG-PET/CT (PETpre) was performed at study entry and before concurrent chemoradiotherapy (interim-PET; PETpost). Interim PETpost metrics and known prognostic clinical parameters were correlated in uni- and multivariable survival analyses. Leave-one-out cross-validation was used to show internal validity. Results: Ninety-two patients who underwent 18F-FDG-PET/CT after induction chemotherapy were enrolled. Median MTVpost value was 5.9 ml. Altogether 85 patients completed the whole chemoradiation with the planned total dose of 60-71 Gy. In univariable proportional hazard analysis, each of the parameters MTVpost, SUVmax(post) and TLGmax(post) was associated with overall survival (P < 0.05). Multivariable survival analysis, including clinical and post-induction PET parameters, found TLGmax(post) (hazard ratio: 1.032 (95%-CI: 1.013-1.052) per 100 ml increase) and total radiation dose (hazard ratio: 0.930 (0.902-0.959) per Gray increase) significantly related with overall survival in the whole group of patients, and also in patients receiving a total dose ≥ 60 Gy. The best leave-one-out cross-validated 2 parameter classifier contained TLGmax(post) and total radiation dose. TLGmax(post) was associated with time to distant metastases (P = 0.0018), and SUVmax(post) with time to loco-regional relapse (P = 0.039) in multivariable analysis of patients receiving a total dose ≥ 60 Gy. Conclusion: Post-induction chemotherapy PET parameters demonstrated prognostic significance. Therefore, an interim 18F-FDG-PET/CT is a promising diagnostic modality for guiding individualized treatment intensification.

Project description:IntroductionThere are currently two recommended radiation strategies for clinical stage III NSCLC: a lower "preoperative" (45-54 Gy) and a higher "definitive/nonsurgical" (60-70 Gy) dose. We sought to determine if definitive radiation doses should be used in the preoperative setting given that many clinical stage III patients planned for surgery are ultimately managed with chemoradiation alone.MethodsUsing the National Cancer Database data from 2006 to 2016, we performed a comparative effectiveness analysis of stage III N2 patients who received chemoradiotherapy. Patients were stratified into subgroups across 2 parameters: (1) radiation dose: lower (45-54 Gy) and higher (60-70 Gy); and (2) the use of surgery (i.e., surgical and nonsurgical treatment approaches). Long-term survival and perioperative outcomes were evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression models.ResultsA cohort of 961 patients received radiation before surgery including 321 who received a higher dose and 640 who received a lower dose. A higher preoperative dose revealed similar long-term mortality risk (hazard ratio = 0.99, 95% confidence interval: 0.82-1.21, p = 0.951) compared with a lower dose. There was no significant association between radiation dose and 90-day mortality (p = 0.982), 30-day readmission (p = 0.931), or prolonged length of stay (p = 0.052) in the surgical cohort. A total of 17,904 clinical-stage IIIA-N2 patients were treated nonsurgically, including 15,945 receiving higher and 1959 treated with a lower dose. A higher dose was associated with a reduction in long-term mortality risk (hazard ratio = 0.64, 95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.67, p < 0.001) compared with a lower dose.ConclusionsFor clinical stage III NSCLC, the administration of 60 to 70 Gy of radiation seems to be more effective than the lower dose for nonsurgical patients without compromising surgical safety for those that undergo resection. This evidence supports the implementation of 60 to 70 Gy as a single-dose strategy for both preoperative and definitive chemoradiotherapy.

Project description:Background We compared cardiac outcomes for surgery-eligible patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer treated adjuvantly or neoadjuvantly with chemotherapy versus chemo-radiation therapy in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database. Methods and Results Patients were age 66+, had stage IIIA/B resectable non-small-cell lung cancer diagnosed between 2007 and 2015, and received adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemo-radiation within 121 days of diagnosis. Patients having chemo-radiation and chemotherapy only were propensity-score matched and followed from day 121 to first cardiac outcome, noncardiac death, radiation initiation by patients who received chemotherapy only, fee-for-service enrollment interruption, or December 31, 2016. Cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and competing risks subdistribution HRs were estimated. The primary outcome was the first of these severe cardiac events: acute myocardial infarction, other hospitalized ischemic heart disease, hospitalized heart failure, percutaneous coronary intervention/coronary artery bypass graft, cardiac death, or urgent/inpatient care for pericardial disease, conduction abnormality, valve disorder, or ischemic heart disease. With median follow-up of 13 months, 70 of 682 patients who received chemo-radiation (10.26%) and 43 of 682 matched patients who received chemotherapy only (6.30%) developed a severe cardiac event (P=0.008) with median time to first event 5.45 months. Chemo-radiation increased the rate of severe cardiac events (cause-specific HR: 1.62 [95% CI, 1.11-2.37] and subdistribution HR: 1.41 [95% CI, 0.97-2.04]). Cancer severity appeared greater among patients who received chemo-radiation (noncardiac death cause-specific HR, 2.53 [95% CI, 1.93-3.33] and subdistribution HR, 2.52 [95% CI, 1.90-3.33]). Conclusions Adding radiation therapy to chemotherapy is associated with an increased risk of severe cardiac events among patients with resectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer for whom survival benefit of radiation therapy is unclear.

Dataset Information

Cost Analysis of PET/CT Versus CT as Surveillance for Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Definitive Radiation Therapy.

Publications

Cost Analysis of PET/CT Versus CT as Surveillance for Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Definitive Radiation Therapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets