Literature DB >> 28196674

Cost-effectiveness analysis of dose-dense versus standard intravenous chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: An economic analysis of results from the Gynecologic Oncology Group protocol 262 randomized controlled trial.

Brandon-Luke L Seagle1, Shohreh Shahabi2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of dose-dense versus standard intravenous adjuvant chemotherapy for ovarian cancer using results from the no-bevacizumab cohort of the Gynecologic Oncology Group protocol 262 (GOG-262) randomized controlled trial, which reported a smaller absolute progression-free survival (PFS) benefit than the prior Japanese trial.
METHODS: A three-state Markov decision model from a healthcare system perspective with a 21day cycle length and 28month time-horizon was used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) values per progression-free life-year saved (PFLYS) using results from GOG-262. Costs of chemotherapy, complications, and surveillance were from Medicare or institutional data. PFS, discontinuation, and complication rates were from GOG-262. Time-dependent transition probabilities and within-cycle corrections were used. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: The model produces standard and dose-dense cohorts with 84.3% and 68.3% progression event proportions at 28months, matching GOG-262 rates at the trial's median follow-up. With a median PFS of 10.3months after standard chemotherapy and a hazard ratio for progression of 0.62 after dose-dense therapy, the ICER for dose-dense chemotherapy is $8074.25 (95% confidence interval: $7615.97-$10,207.16) per PFLYS. ICER estimates are sensitive only to the hazard ratio estimate but do not exceed $100,000 per PFLYS. 99.8% of ICER estimates met a more stringent willingness-to-pay of $50,000 per PFLYS. The willingness-to-pay value at which there is a 90% probability of dose-dense treatment being cost-effective is $12,000 per PFLYS.
CONCLUSIONS: Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy is robustly cost-effective for advanced ovarian cancer from a healthcare system perspective based on results from GOG-262.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28196674     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.02.014

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


  5 in total

1.  Impact of robotic surgery on patient flow and resource use intensity in ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Jeremie Abitbol; Beste Kucukyazici; Sonya Brin; Susie Lau; Shannon Salvador; Agnihotram V Ramanakumar; Roy Kessous; Liron Kogan; John D Fletcher; Valerie Pare-Miron; Gilbert Liu; Walter H Gotlieb
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-08-04

Review 2.  Weekly versus tri-weekly paclitaxel with carboplatin for first-line treatment in women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Natalie Yl Ngoi; Nicholas Lx Syn; Robby M Goh; Boon Cher Goh; Ruby Yun-Ju Huang; Yu Yang Soon; Elizabeth James; Adrian Cook; Andrew Clamp; David Sp Tan
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-02-21

3.  Reducing the pain: A cost-effectiveness analysis of transversus abdominis plane block using liposomal bupivacaine for outpatient laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.

Authors:  Alexander L Colonna; Brandon K Bellows; Toby M Enniss; Jason B Young; Marta McCrum; Jade M Nunez; Raminder Nirula; Richard E Nelson
Journal:  Surg Open Sci       Date:  2020-01-23

4.  Transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine compared to oral opioids alone for acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Brandon-Luke L Seagle; Emily S Miller; Anna E Strohl; Anna Hoekstra; Shohreh Shahabi
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol Res Pract       Date:  2017-08-22

5.  Comparing Paclitaxel-Carboplatin with Paclitaxel-Cisplatin as the Front-Line Chemotherapy for Patients with FIGO IIIC Serous-Type Tubo-Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Chen-Yu Huang; Min Cheng; Na-Rong Lee; Hsin-Yi Huang; Wen-Ling Lee; Wen-Hsun Chang; Peng-Hui Wang
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-03-26       Impact factor: 3.390

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.