Literature DB >> 25443528

Cost-effectiveness analysis of 3D image-guided brachytherapy compared with 2D brachytherapy in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer.

Hayeon Kim1, Malolan S Rajagopalan2, Sushil Beriwal2, M Saiful Huq2, Kenneth J Smith3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Three-dimensional image-guided brachytherapy (IGBT) is a significant advance in locally advanced cervical cancer treatment. However, its cost-effectiveness (C/E) is unknown. We performed a C/E analysis of IGBT compared with conventional (two-dimensional [2D]) brachytherapy in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A Markov model was constructed to model locally advanced cervical cancer treated with five fractions of high-dose-rate brachytherapy. The model captured clinical parameters, quality of life utility, and treatment costs through the literature review. Costs were 2013 Medicare reimbursement. Strategies were compared using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). To account for uncertainty, one-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Strategies were evaluated from a payer's perspective with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY gained.
RESULTS: Treatment costs for five fractions of IGBT and 2D brachytherapy were $21,374 and $17,931, respectively. In the base-case analysis, the IGBT strategy costs $3003 more than 2D brachytherapy while gaining 0.16 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $18,634 per QALY gained. In one-way sensitivity analyses, results were most sensitive to variation of treatment costs, but the ICER remained <$50,000/QALY gained for all cost ranges. Variation of survival, local control, and complication rates was less influential. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that IGBT was favored in 63% of model iterations at a $50,000/QALY gained threshold.
CONCLUSION: IGBT for locally advanced cervical cancer is a C/E option compared with 2D brachytherapy. These findings were robust to variation of parameter values supporting the routine use of IGBT in locally advanced cervical cancer.
Copyright © 2015 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Brachytherapy; Cervical cancer; Cost-effectiveness; IGBT

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25443528     DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2014.09.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brachytherapy        ISSN: 1538-4721            Impact factor:   2.362


  11 in total

Review 1.  Radiation costing methods: a systematic review.

Authors:  F Rahman; S J Seung; S Y Cheng; H Saherawala; C C Earle; N Mittmann
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 2.  Increasing global accessibility to high-level treatments for cervical cancers.

Authors:  C Chargari; M Arbyn; A Leary; N R Abu-Rustum; P Basu; F Bray; S Chopra; R Nout; K Tanderup; A N Viswanathan; C Zacharopoulou; J C Soria; E Deutsch; S Gouy; P Morice
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 5.304

Review 3.  Radiotherapy for cervical cancer: Chilean consensus of the Society of Radiation Oncology.

Authors:  Felipe Carvajal; Claudia Carvajal; Tomás Merino; Verónica López; Javier Retamales; Evelyn San Martín; Freddy Alarcón; Mónica Cuevas; Francisca Barahona; Ignacio Véliz; Juvenal A Ríos; Sergio Becerra
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2021-04-14

4.  Verification of Guiding Needle Placement by Registered Ultrasound Image During Combined Intracavitary/Interstitial Gynecologic Brachytherapy.

Authors:  Jing Zeng; Ziqi Liu; Shan Jiang; Qingsong Pang; Ping Wang
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 3.989

5.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Chemoradiation and Radiotherapy Treatment for Stage IIB and IIIB Cervical Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Irma M Puspitasari; Dewi Legianawati; Rano K Sinuraya; Auliya A Suwantika
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2021-02-19

6.  Current status of brachytherapy in Korea: a national survey of radiation oncologists.

Authors:  Haeyoung Kim; Joo Young Kim; Juree Kim; Won Park; Young Seok Kim; Hak Jae Kim; Yong Bae Kim
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2016-02-03       Impact factor: 4.401

7.  The use of trans-applicator intracavitary ultrasonography in brachytherapy for cervical cancer: phantom study of a novel approach to 3D image-guided brachytherapy.

Authors:  Tomoaki Tamaki; Kazunori Miyaura; Toshihiro Murakami; Yu Kumazaki; Yoshiyuki Suzuki; Takashi Nakano; Shingo Kato
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2017-03-15

Review 8.  Practical brachytherapy solutions to an age-old quandary.

Authors:  N Thiruthaneeswaran; H Tharmalingam; P J Hoskin
Journal:  Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-10-26

9.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Diagnostic Tests for Para-Aortic Lymph Node Detection in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Kanyarat Katanyoo; Usa Chaikledkaew; Montarat Thavorncharoensap; Arthorn Riewpaiboon
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2021-11-22

10.  IMRT, IGRT, and other high technology becomes standard in external beam radiotherapy: But is image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer too expensive?

Authors:  Jamema V Swamidas; Christian Kirisits
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2015 Jan-Mar
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.