Literature DB >> 22659191

Management of complex pelvic masses using a multivariate index assay: a decision analysis.

Kenneth H Kim1, Gretchen N Zsebik, J Michael Straughn, Charles N Landen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop a cost-minimization analysis of a multivariate index assay (MIA) used for women with complex pelvic masses.
METHODS: A decision analysis model was used to evaluate 81,000 hypothetical patients with a complex pelvic mass requiring surgery. Three strategies were evaluated: (1) referral to a gynecologic oncologist (GO) based on clinical assessment including physical exam, ultrasonography, and CA125 (CLINICAL); (2) utilization of a multivariate index assay (MIA); or (3) referral of all patients to a GO (REFER ALL). Various reoperation rates were evaluated with sensitivity analyses. Actual payer costs were compared between each strategy.
RESULTS: The CLINICAL strategy cost $933.9 million (M) and resulted in 72% of patients receiving appropriate initial surgical staging. The REFER ALL strategy cost $939.7 M and all patients were appropriately staged. The MIA strategy cost $976.7 M and resulted in 91% of patients having appropriate initial staging. Using conservative reoperation rates (10-20%), 461 patients required reoperation using CLINICAL strategy compared to 142 patients in MIA strategy. Using aggressive reoperation rates (40-50%), 1715 patients required reoperation using CLINICAL strategy resulting in an incremental cost of $15.2M compared to 529 patients at $4.7 M in MIA strategy. The increased costs associated with an aggressive reoperation rate resulted in the REFER ALL strategy being the least expensive alternative, with the highest rates of appropriate initial surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing an MIA resulted in more ovarian cancer patients receiving appropriate initial surgery, but at increased costs. Referring all patients with complex masses avoids the most reoperations at reduced cost compared to using an MIA.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22659191      PMCID: PMC3696192          DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.05.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  14 in total

1.  Committee Opinion No. 477: the role of the obstetrician-gynecologist in the early detection of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 7.661

2.  A population-based study of patterns of care for ovarian cancer: who is seen by a gynecologic oncologist and who is not?

Authors:  Michael E Carney; Johnathan M Lancaster; Clyde Ford; Alexander Tsodikov; Charles L Wiggins
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  Effectiveness of a multivariate index assay in the preoperative assessment of ovarian tumors.

Authors:  Frederick R Ueland; Christopher P Desimone; Leigh G Seamon; Rachel A Miller; Scott Goodrich; Iwona Podzielinski; Lori Sokoll; Alan Smith; John R van Nagell; Zhen Zhang
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Cancer statistics, 2011: the impact of eliminating socioeconomic and racial disparities on premature cancer deaths.

Authors:  Rebecca Siegel; Elizabeth Ward; Otis Brawley; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2011-06-17       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Performance of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' ovarian tumor referral guidelines with a multivariate index assay.

Authors:  Rachel Ware Miller; Alan Smith; Christopher P DeSimone; Leigh Seamon; Scott Goodrich; Iwona Podzielinski; Lori Sokoll; John R van Nagell; Zhen Zhang; Frederick R Ueland
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 6.  Accuracy of frozen-section analysis in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a systematic quantitative review.

Authors:  L R Medeiros; D D Rosa; M I Edelweiss; A T Stein; M C Bozzetti; A Zelmanowicz; P R Pohlmann; L Meurer; M T Carballo
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.437

7.  Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Robert E Bristow; Rafael S Tomacruz; Deborah K Armstrong; Edward L Trimble; F J Montz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2002-03-01       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  The effect of centralization of primary surgery on survival in ovarian cancer patients.

Authors:  Solveig Tingulstad; Finn Egil Skjeldestad; Bjørn Hagen
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Staging laparotomy in early ovarian cancer.

Authors:  R C Young; D G Decker; J T Wharton; M S Piver; W F Sindelar; B K Edwards; J P Smith
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1983-12-09       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  The surgical management of women with ovarian cancer in the south west of England.

Authors:  A Olaitan; J Weeks; A Mocroft; J Smith; K Howe; J Murdoch
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2001-12-14       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  2 in total

1.  Economic Impact of Increased Utilization of Multivariate Assay Testing to Guide the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer: Implications for Payers.

Authors:  Burton S Brodsky; Gary M Owens; Dennis J Scotti; Keith A Needham; Christina L Cool
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2017-10

2.  Distinguishing benign from malignant pelvic mass utilizing an algorithm with HE4, menopausal status, and ultrasound findings.

Authors:  Sarikapan Wilailak; Karen K L Chan; Chi An Chen; Joo Hyun Nam; Kazunori Ochiai; Tar Choon Aw; Subathra Sabaratnam; Sudarshan Hebbar; Jaganathan Sickan; Beth A Schodin; Chuenkamon Charakorn; Walfrido W Sumpaico
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 4.401

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.