PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of imaging strategies for the assessment of resectability in patients with pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision model was developed to calculate costs and benefits (survival) accruing to hypothetical cohorts of patients with known or suspected pancreatic cancer. Results are presented as cost per life-year gained under various scenarios and assumptions of diagnostic test characteristics, surgical mortality, disease characteristics, and costs. RESULTS: With best estimates for all data inputs, the strategy of computed tomography (CT) followed by laparoscopy and laparoscopic ultrasonography (US) had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $87,502 per life-year gained, compared with best supportive care. This strategy was significantly more cost-effective than CT followed by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and was significantly less expensive than other imaging strategies while providing a statistically and clinically insignificant difference in life-year gains. A strategy involving no imaging (immediate surgery) was more expensive but less effective than all imaging strategies. A hypothetical perfect test with cost equal to that of CT followed by MR had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $64,401 per life-year gained, compared to best supportive care. CONCLUSION: Most available imaging tests for assessing resectability of pancreatic cancer do not differ in effectiveness, but a strategy of CT, laparoscopy, and laparoscopic US would consistently result in significantly lower costs than other imaging tests under a wide range of scenarios.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of imaging strategies for the assessment of resectability in patients with pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision model was developed to calculate costs and benefits (survival) accruing to hypothetical cohorts of patients with known or suspected pancreatic cancer. Results are presented as cost per life-year gained under various scenarios and assumptions of diagnostic test characteristics, surgical mortality, disease characteristics, and costs. RESULTS: With best estimates for all data inputs, the strategy of computed tomography (CT) followed by laparoscopy and laparoscopic ultrasonography (US) had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $87,502 per life-year gained, compared with best supportive care. This strategy was significantly more cost-effective than CT followed by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and was significantly less expensive than other imaging strategies while providing a statistically and clinically insignificant difference in life-year gains. A strategy involving no imaging (immediate surgery) was more expensive but less effective than all imaging strategies. A hypothetical perfect test with cost equal to that of CT followed by MR had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $64,401 per life-year gained, compared to best supportive care. CONCLUSION: Most available imaging tests for assessing resectability of pancreatic cancer do not differ in effectiveness, but a strategy of CT, laparoscopy, and laparoscopic US would consistently result in significantly lower costs than other imaging tests under a wide range of scenarios.
Authors: X P Wang; K Yazawa; N S Templeton; J Yang; Shihe Liu; Zhijun Li; M Li; Q Yao; C Chen; F C Brunicardi Journal: World J Surg Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: J Ellsmere; K Mortele; D Sahani; M Maher; V Cantisani; W Wells; D Brooks; D Rattner Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2004-12-23 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Robert Grützmann; Alfred Bunk; Stephan Kersting; Christian Pilarsky; Frank Dobrowolski; Eberhard Kuhlisch; Detlef Ockert; Hans Detlev Saeger Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2003-08-09 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Wesley H Greenblatt; Chin Hur; Amy B Knudsen; John A Evans; Daniel C Chung; G Scott Gazelle Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2009-09-29 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: B N J Thomson; R W Parks; D N Redhead; F K S Welsh; K K Madhavan; S J Wigmore; O J Garden Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2006-01-30 Impact factor: 7.640