Doug Coyle1, Eva Grunfeld, Kathryn Coyle, Gregory Pond, Jim A Julian, Mark N Levine. 1. University of Ottawa; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; Applied Health Economics Research Unit, Ottawa; Ontario Institute for Cancer Research; University of Toronto, Toronto; Ontario Clinical Oncology Group; McMaster University; and Juravinski Regional Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE:Survivorship care plans (SCPs) are recommended for patients who have completed primary treatment and are transitioning to routine follow-up care. However, SCPs may be costly, and their effectiveness is unproven. The study objective was to assess the cost effectiveness of an SCP for breast cancer survivors transitioning to routine follow-up care with their own primary care physician (PCP) using data from a recent randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: Resource use and utility data for 408 patients with breast cancer enrolled in the RCT comparing an SCP with standard care (no SCP) were used. The intervention group received a 30-minute educational session with a nurse and their SCP, and their PCPs received the SCP plus a full guideline on follow-up. Analysis assessed the societal costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for the intervention group and the control group over the 2-year follow-up of the RCT. Uncertainty concerning cost effectiveness was assessed through nonparametric bootstrapping and deterministic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The no-SCP group had better outcomes than the SCP group: total costs per patient were lower for standard care (Canadian $698 v $765), and total QALYs were almost equivalent (1.42 for standard care v 1.41 for the SCP). The probability that the SCP was cost effective was 0.26 at a threshold value of a QALY of $50,000. A variety of sensitivity analyses did not change the conclusions of the analysis. CONCLUSION: This SCP would be costly to introduce and would not be a cost effective use of scarce health care resources.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) are recommended for patients who have completed primary treatment and are transitioning to routine follow-up care. However, SCPs may be costly, and their effectiveness is unproven. The study objective was to assess the cost effectiveness of an SCP for breast cancer survivors transitioning to routine follow-up care with their own primary care physician (PCP) using data from a recent randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: Resource use and utility data for 408 patients with breast cancer enrolled in the RCT comparing an SCP with standard care (no SCP) were used. The intervention group received a 30-minute educational session with a nurse and their SCP, and their PCPs received the SCP plus a full guideline on follow-up. Analysis assessed the societal costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for the intervention group and the control group over the 2-year follow-up of the RCT. Uncertainty concerning cost effectiveness was assessed through nonparametric bootstrapping and deterministic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The no-SCP group had better outcomes than the SCP group: total costs per patient were lower for standard care (Canadian $698 v $765), and total QALYs were almost equivalent (1.42 for standard care v 1.41 for the SCP). The probability that the SCP was cost effective was 0.26 at a threshold value of a QALY of $50,000. A variety of sensitivity analyses did not change the conclusions of the analysis. CONCLUSION: This SCP would be costly to introduce and would not be a cost effective use of scarce health care resources.
Authors: Sarah A Birken; Alecia S Clary; Shampa Bernstein; Jamiyla Bolton; Miriam Tardif-Douglin; Deborah K Mayer; Allison M Deal; Sara R Jacobs Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2018-07-13 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Sarah A Birken; Sarah Raskin; Yuqing Zhang; Gema Lane; Alexandra Zizzi; Mandi Pratt-Chapman Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Sarah A Birken; Robin Urquhart; Corrine Munoz-Plaza; Alexandra R Zizzi; Emily Haines; Angela Stover; Deborah K Mayer; Erin E Hahn Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2018-03-23 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Rebecca E Hill; Claire E Wakefield; Richard J Cohn; Joanna E Fardell; Mary-Ellen E Brierley; Emily Kothe; Paul B Jacobsen; Kate Hetherington; Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-10-25
Authors: Rebecca E Hill; Claire E Wakefield; Richard J Cohn; Joanna E Fardell; Mary-Ellen E Brierley; Emily Kothe; Paul B Jacobsen; Kate Hetherington; Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-10-25
Authors: Paul B Jacobsen; Antonio P DeRosa; Tara O Henderson; Deborah K Mayer; Chaya S Moskowitz; Electra D Paskett; Julia H Rowland Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-05-18 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Leigh Anne Faul; Gheorghe Luta; Vanessa Sheppard; Claudine Isaacs; Harvey J Cohen; Hyman B Muss; Rachel Yung; Jonathan D Clapp; Eric Winer; Clifford Hudis; Michelle Tallarico; Julhy Wang; William T Barry; Jeanne S Mandelblatt Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2014-06-11 Impact factor: 4.442