Dataset Information

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Local Ablation and Surgery for Liver Metastases of Oligometastatic Colorectal Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Colorectal cancer is among the most prevalent cancer entities worldwide, with every second patient developing liver metastases during their illness. For local treatment of liver metastases, a surgical approach as well as ablative treatment options, such as microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), are available. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RFA, MWA and surgery in the treatment of liver metastases of oligometastatic colorectal cancer (omCRC) that are amenable for all investigated treatment modalities.

Methods

A decision analysis based on a Markov model assessed lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) related to the treatment strategies RFA, MWA and surgical resection. Input parameters were based on the best available and most recent evidence. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed with Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate model robustness. The percentage of cost-effective iterations was determined for different willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds.

Results

The base-case analysis showed that surgery led to higher long-term costs compared to RFA and MWA (USD 41,848 vs. USD 36,937 vs. USD 35,234), while providing better long-term outcomes than RFA, yet slightly lower than MWA (6.80 vs. 6.30 vs. 6.95 QALYs for surgery, RFA and MWA, respectively). In PSA, MWA was the most cost-effective strategy for all WTP thresholds below USD 80,000 per QALY.

Conclusions

In omCRC patients with liver metastases, MWA and surgery are estimated to provide comparable efficacy. MWA was identified as the most cost-effective strategy in intermediate resource settings and should be considered as an alternative to surgery in high resource settings.

SUBMITTER: Froelich MF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8037107 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn certain malignancies, patients with oligometastatic disease benefit from radical ablative or surgical treatment. The SABR-COMET trial demonstrated a survival benefit for oligometastatic patients randomized to local stereotactic ablative radiation (SABR) compared to patients receiving standard care (SC) alone. Our aim was to determine the cost-effectiveness of SABR.Materials and methodsA decision model based on partitioned survival simulations estimated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) associated with both strategies in a United States setting from a health care perspective. Analyses were performed over the trial duration of six years as well as a long-term horizon of 16 years. Model input parameters were based on the SABR-COMET trial data as well as best available and most recent data provided in the published literature. An annual discount of 3% for costs was implemented in the analysis. All costs were adjusted to 2019 US Dollars according to the United States Consumer Price Index. SABR costs were reported with an average of $11,700 per treatment. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Incremental costs, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set to $100,000/QALY.ResultsBased on increased overall and progression-free survival, the SABR group showed 0.78 incremental QALYs over the trial duration and 1.34 incremental QALYs over the long-term analysis. Treatment with SABR led to a marginal increase in costs compared to SC alone (SABR: $304,656; SC: $303,523 for 6 years; ICER $1,446/QALY and SABR: $402,888; SC: $350,708 for long-term analysis; ICER $38,874/QALY). Therapy with SABR remained cost-effective until treatment costs of $88,969 over the trial duration (i.e. 7.6 times the average cost). Sensitivity analysis identified a strong model impact for ongoing annual costs of oligo- and polymetastatic disease states.ConclusionOur analysis suggests that local treatment with SABR adds QALYs for patients with certain oligometastatic cancers and represents an intermediate- and long-term cost-effective treatment strategy.

Project description:PURPOSE:The goal of this study was to develop and evaluate a volumetric three-dimensional (3D) approach to improve the accuracy of ablation margin assessment following thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. METHODS:The 3D margin assessment technique was developed to generate the new 3D assessment metrics: volumes of insufficient coverage (VICs) measuring volume of tissue at risk post-ablation. VICs were computed for the tumor and tumor plus theoretical 5- and 10-mm margins. The diagnostic accuracy of the 3D assessment to predict 2-year local tumor progression (LTP) was compared to that of manual 2D assessment using retrospective analysis of a patient cohort that has previously been reported as a part of an outcome-centered study. Eighty-six consecutive patients with 108 colorectal cancer liver metastases treated with radiofrequency ablation (2002-2012) were used for evaluation. The 2-year LTP discrimination power was assessed using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis. RESULTS:A 3D assessment of margins was successfully completed for 93 out of 108 tumors. The minimum margin size measured using the 3D method had higher discrimination power compared with the 2D method, with an AUC value of 0.893 vs. 0.790 (p?=?0.01). The new 5-mm VIC metric had the highest 2-year LTP discrimination power with an AUC value of 0.923 (p?=?0.004). CONCLUSIONS:Volumetric semi-automated 3D assessment of the ablation zone in the liver is feasible and can improve accuracy of 2-year LTP prediction following thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. KEY POINTS:• More accurate prediction of local tumor progression risk using volumetric 3D ablation zone assessment can help improve the efficacy of image-guided percutaneous thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. • The accuracy of evaluation of ablation zone margins after thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases can be improved using a volumetric 3D semi-automated assessment approach and the volume of insufficient coverage assessment metric. • The new 5-mm volume-of-insufficient-coverage metric, indicating the volume of tumor plus 5-mm margin that remained untreated, had the highest 2-year local tumor progression discrimination power.

Project description:ImportanceSurgery represents the mainstay treatment of colorectal liver metastases. Indications for the laparoscopic approach in this setting have been widened and there is a need to confirm the benefits of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) in patients with complex disease states.ObjectiveTo compare outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with those of open surgery for liver metastases from colorectal cancer, focusing on the characteristics of modern MILS and therefore overcoming possible selection bias related to different policies for patients' eligibility for MILS over time.Design, setting, and participantsA cohort study of 885 resections performed for liver metastases from colorectal cancer between January 1, 2004, and June 30, 2017, at the Hepatobiliary Surgery Unit of San Raffaele Hospital, Milano, Italy, comprising 187 laparoscopic and 698 open resections. Procedures performed using the MILS approach with a ratio of MILS to total resections per year of more than 30% were considered and were matched by propensity scores (ratio of 1:4) to procedures performed using the open approach with a ratio of MILS to total resections per year of less than 30%.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was short-term outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, functional recovery, and interval between surgery and adjuvant treatments; the secondary end point was long-term outcomes.ResultsAmong this cohort (104 patients in the MILS group; 46 women and 58 men; median age, 62 years [range, 35-81 years]; and 412 patients in the open group; 181 women and 231 men; median age, 60 years [range, 37-80 years]), primary end-point data showed a significantly higher incidence of postoperative morbidity in patients who underwent open resections compared with those who underwent MILS (94 [22.8%] vs 21 [20.2%]; P = .04). Patients in the MILS group had fewer major complications (Dindo-Clavien grades III-V) compared with patients in the open group (Dindo-Clavien grades III-V; 7 [6.7%] vs 35 [8.5%]; P = .03) as well as shorter lengths of stay (median [range] duration, 3 [2-35] vs 5 [4-37] days; P = .02). Oncologic results were not compromised by the laparoscopic approach.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, the results of the propensity score matching analysis between modern laparoscopic surgery and previous open surgery appear to confer more comparable cohorts for complexity, further supporting the advantages of laparoscopy in the surgical treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer. The increase in use that laparoscopy has experienced appears to be based on increased feasibility, widening of eligibility criteria for patients, enhanced clinical effectiveness, and oncologic outcomes. All these elements together suggest that up to 70% of patients appear to be candidates for this minimally invasive surgical approach in high-volume centers.