Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of concurrent radiation with cetuximab or chemotherapy in older patients with oropharyngeal cancer.

ABSTRACT: Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of definitive therapies for nonmetastatic oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Materials & methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset, patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 were identified. The cost-effectiveness of chemoradiation (CRT) versus radiotherapy (RT), cetuximab plus RT (cetuximab-RT) versus RT and cetuximab-RT versus CRT were estimated. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CRT compared with RT from 2000 to 2005 was US$56,650 (95% CI: US$4,522-$288,688) per additional year of survival. CRT was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. Cetuximab-RT was dominated by RT and CRT. Conclusion: CRT had a favorable value from 2000 to 2005 but was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. The value of cetuximab-RT compared with RT/CRT was not favorable with similar/inferior survival and substantial incremental costs.

SUBMITTER: Albarmawi H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9344437 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of concurrent radiation with cetuximab or chemotherapy in older patients with oropharyngeal cancer.

Albarmawi Husam H Cullen Kevin J KJ Mehra Ranee R Onukwugha Eberechukwu E Goloubeva Olga O

Journal of comparative effectiveness research 20220511 8

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of definitive therapies for nonmetastatic oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Materials & methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset, patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 were identified. The cost-effectiveness of chemoradiation (CRT) versus radiotherapy (RT), cetuximab plus RT (cetuximab-RT) versus RT and cetuximab-RT versus CRT were estimated. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CRT com ...[more]

PMID: 35543585

Similar Datasets

Project description:The treatment of colorectal cancer is rapidly becoming a significant financial burden to health-care systems within economically developed nations. A current challenge for oncologists and health-care payers is to integrate new, often high-cost, biologic therapies into clinical practice. Inherent to this process is the consideration of cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of cetuximab plus irinotecan with an appropriate comparator from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective. This economic evaluation is a trial-based study of cetuximab vs active/best supportive care. Effectiveness estimates for the treatment groups were modelled from key clinical trials. Cunningham et al (2004) compared cetuximab/irinotecan with cetuximab monotherapy; Cunningham et al (1998) compared irinotecan monotherapy in a second-line setting with supportive care. Modelling was necessary owing to an absence of head-to-head clinical trial data of cetuximab/irinotecan vs current standard care. Costs were calculated for the study drugs received, associated administration, palliative chemotherapy for patients in the standard care arm and other nonchemotherapy resources. The discounted life-expectancy of patients treated with cetuximab/irinotecan was 0.91 life-years, and 0.47 discounted life-years for patients receiving active/best supportive care. Patients treated with cetuximab/irinotecan accumulated mean additional costs of 18 901 pounds per patient relative to the comparator arm, with 11 802 pounds attributable to cetuximab. The incremental cost per life-year gained with cetuximab/irinotecan therapy compared with active/best supportive care was 42 975 pounds . The incremental cost per quality adjusted life-year gained was 57 608 pounds . The incremental cost per life-year gained for cetuximab/irinotecan is relatively high compared with other health-care interventions. However, this result should be considered in the context of a number of factors specific to the treated patient population.

Project description:BackgroundProton therapy is a promising advancement in radiation oncology especially in terms of reducing normal tissue toxicity, although it is currently expensive and of limited availability. Here we estimated the individual quality of life benefit and cost-effectiveness of proton therapy in patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT), as a decision-making tool for treatment individualization.Methods and materialsNormal tissue complication probability models were used to estimate the risk of dysphagia, esophagitis, hypothyroidism, xerostomia and oral mucositis for 33 patients, comparing delivered photon intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) plans to intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost were calculated for each complication while accounting for patient-specific conditional survival probability and assigning quality-adjustment factors based on complication severity. Cost-effectiveness was modeled based on upfront costs of IMPT and IMRT, and the cost of acute and/or long-term management of treatment complications. Uncertainties in all model parameters and sensitivity analyses were included through Monte Carlo sampling.ResultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) showed considerable variability in the cost of QALYs spared between patients, with median $361,405/QALY for all patients, varying from $54,477/QALY to $1,508,845/QALY between individual patients. Proton therapy was more likely to be cost-effective for patients with p16-positive tumors ($234,201/QALY), compared to p16-negative tumors ($516,297/QALY). For patients with p16-positive tumors treated with comprehensive nodal irradiation, proton therapy is estimated to be cost-effective in ≥ 50% of sampled cases for 8/9 patients at $500,000/QALY, compared to 6/24 patients who either have p16-negative tumors or receive unilateral neck irradiation.ConclusionsProton therapy cost-effectiveness varies greatly among oropharyngeal cancer patients, and highlights the importance of individualized decision-making. Although the upfront cost, societal willingness to pay and healthcare administration can vary greatly among different countries, identifying patients for whom proton therapy will have the greatest benefit can optimize resource allocation and inform prospective clinical trial design.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of concurrent radiation with cetuximab or chemotherapy in older patients with oropharyngeal cancer.

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of concurrent radiation with cetuximab or chemotherapy in older patients with oropharyngeal cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets