Chin Hur1, Sung Eun Choi2, Joel H Rubenstein3, Chung Yin Kong4, Norman S Nishioka5, Dawn T Provenzale6, John M Inadomi7. 1. Gastrointestinal Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: chur@partners.org. 2. Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Division of Gastroenterology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 4. Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Gastrointestinal Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Durham VA Medical Center, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 7. Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) reduces the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD), but its effects in patients without dysplasia are debatable. We analyzed the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of RFA for the management of BE. METHODS: We constructed a decision analytic Markov model. We conducted separate analyses of hypothetical cohorts of patients with BE with dysplasia (HGD or low-grade [LGD]) and without dysplasia. In the analysis of the group with HGD, we compared results of initial RFA with endoscopic surveillance with surgery when cancer was detected. In analyzing the group with LGD or no dysplasia, we compared 3 strategies: endoscopic surveillance with surgery when cancer was detected (S1), endoscopic surveillance with RFA when HGD was detected (S2), and initial RFA followed by endoscopic surveillance (S3). RESULTS: Among patients with HGD, initial RFA was more effective and less costly than endoscopic surveillance. Among patients with LGD, when S3 was compared with S2, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $18,231/quality-adjusted life-year, assuming an annual rate of progression rate from LGD to EAC of 0.5%/year. For patients without dysplasia, S2 was more effective and less costly than S1. In a comparison of S3 with S2, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $205,500, $124,796, and $118,338/quality-adjusted life-year using annual rates of progression of no dysplasia to EAC of 0.12%, 0.33%, or 0.5% per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: By using updated data, initial RFA might not be cost effective for patients with BE without dysplasia, within the range of plausible rates of progression of BE to EAC, and be prohibitively expensive, from a policy perspective. RFA might be cost effective for confirmed and stable LGD. Initial RFA is more effective and less costly than endoscopic surveillance in HGD.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) reduces the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD), but its effects in patients without dysplasia are debatable. We analyzed the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of RFA for the management of BE. METHODS: We constructed a decision analytic Markov model. We conducted separate analyses of hypothetical cohorts of patients with BE with dysplasia (HGD or low-grade [LGD]) and without dysplasia. In the analysis of the group with HGD, we compared results of initial RFA with endoscopic surveillance with surgery when cancer was detected. In analyzing the group with LGD or no dysplasia, we compared 3 strategies: endoscopic surveillance with surgery when cancer was detected (S1), endoscopic surveillance with RFA when HGD was detected (S2), and initial RFA followed by endoscopic surveillance (S3). RESULTS: Among patients with HGD, initial RFA was more effective and less costly than endoscopic surveillance. Among patients with LGD, when S3 was compared with S2, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $18,231/quality-adjusted life-year, assuming an annual rate of progression rate from LGD to EAC of 0.5%/year. For patients without dysplasia, S2 was more effective and less costly than S1. In a comparison of S3 with S2, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $205,500, $124,796, and $118,338/quality-adjusted life-year using annual rates of progression of no dysplasia to EAC of 0.12%, 0.33%, or 0.5% per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: By using updated data, initial RFA might not be cost effective for patients with BE without dysplasia, within the range of plausible rates of progression of BE to EAC, and be prohibitively expensive, from a policy perspective. RFA might be cost effective for confirmed and stable LGD. Initial RFA is more effective and less costly than endoscopic surveillance in HGD.
Authors: Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Milton C Weinstein; Murray A Mittleman; Robert J Glynn; Joseph S Pliskin Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2002 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: T G Schnell; S J Sontag; G Chejfec; G Aranha; A Metz; S O'Connell; U J Seidel; A Sonnenberg Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Douglas A Corley; Theodore R Levin; Laurel A Habel; Noel S Weiss; Patricia A Buffler Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: A G E M de Boer; P F M Stalmeier; M A G Sprangers; J C J M de Haes; J W van Sandick; J B F Hulscher; J J B van Lanschot Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2002-03-18 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Kazuhiro Yasuda; Sung Eun Choi; Norman S Nishioka; David W Rattner; William P Puricelli; Angela C Tramontano; Seigo Kitano; Chin Hur Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2014-01-07 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Rajesh Krishnamoorthi; Jason T Lewis; Murli Krishna; Nicholas J Crews; Michele L Johnson; Ross A Dierkhising; Brenda F Ginos; Kenneth K Wang; Herbert C Wolfsen; David E Fleischer; Francisco C Ramirez; Navtej S Buttar; David A Katzka; Prasad G Iyer Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Milli Gupta; Prasad G Iyer; Lori Lutzke; Emmanuel C Gorospe; Julian A Abrams; Gary W Falk; Gregory G Ginsberg; Anil K Rustgi; Charles J Lightdale; Timothy C Wang; David I Fudman; John M Poneros; Kenneth K Wang Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2013-03-15 Impact factor: 22.682