BACKGROUND: Although proton radiation treatments are more costly than photon/X-ray therapy, they may lower overall treatment costs through reducing rates of severe toxicities and the costly management of those toxicities. To study this issue, we created a decision-model comparing proton vs. X-ray radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients. METHODS: An influence diagram was created to model for radiation delivery, associated 6-month pneumonitis/esophagitis rates, and overall costs (radiation plus toxicity costs). Pneumonitis (age, chemo type, V20, MLD) and esophagitis (V60) predictors were modeled to impact toxicity rates. We performed toxicity-adjusted, rate-adjusted, risk group-adjusted, and radiosensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Upfront proton treatment costs exceeded that of photons [$16,730.37 (3DCRT), $23,893.83 (IMRT), $41,061.80 (protons)]. Based upon expected population pneumonitis and esophagitis rates for each modality, protons would be expected to recover $1,065.62 and $1,139.63 of the cost difference compared to 3DCRT or IMRT. For patients treated with IMRT experiencing grade 4 pneumonitis or grade 4 esophagitis, costs exceeded patients treated with protons without this toxicity. 3DCRT patients with grade 4 esophagitis had higher costs than proton patients without this toxicity. For the risk group analysis, high risk patients (age >65, carboplatin/paclitaxel) benefited more from proton therapy. A biomarker may allow patient selection for proton therapy, although the AUC alone is not sufficient to determine if the biomarker is clinically useful. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison between proton and photon/X-ray radiation therapy for NSCLC needs to consider both the up-front cost of treatment and the possible long term cost of complications. In our analysis, current costs favor X-ray therapy. However, relatively small reductions in the cost of proton therapy may result in a shift to the preference for proton therapy.
BACKGROUND: Although proton radiation treatments are more costly than photon/X-ray therapy, they may lower overall treatment costs through reducing rates of severe toxicities and the costly management of those toxicities. To study this issue, we created a decision-model comparing proton vs. X-ray radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients. METHODS: An influence diagram was created to model for radiation delivery, associated 6-month pneumonitis/esophagitis rates, and overall costs (radiation plus toxicity costs). Pneumonitis (age, chemo type, V20, MLD) and esophagitis (V60) predictors were modeled to impact toxicity rates. We performed toxicity-adjusted, rate-adjusted, risk group-adjusted, and radiosensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Upfront proton treatment costs exceeded that of photons [$16,730.37 (3DCRT), $23,893.83 (IMRT), $41,061.80 (protons)]. Based upon expected population pneumonitis and esophagitis rates for each modality, protons would be expected to recover $1,065.62 and $1,139.63 of the cost difference compared to 3DCRT or IMRT. For patients treated with IMRT experiencing grade 4 pneumonitis or grade 4 esophagitis, costs exceeded patients treated with protons without this toxicity. 3DCRT patients with grade 4 esophagitis had higher costs than proton patients without this toxicity. For the risk group analysis, high risk patients (age >65, carboplatin/paclitaxel) benefited more from proton therapy. A biomarker may allow patient selection for proton therapy, although the AUC alone is not sufficient to determine if the biomarker is clinically useful. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison between proton and photon/X-ray radiation therapy for NSCLC needs to consider both the up-front cost of treatment and the possible long term cost of complications. In our analysis, current costs favor X-ray therapy. However, relatively small reductions in the cost of proton therapy may result in a shift to the preference for proton therapy.
Authors: Janneke P C Grutters; Keith R Abrams; Dirk de Ruysscher; Madelon Pijls-Johannesma; Hans J M Peters; Eric Beutner; Philippe Lambin; Manuela A Joore Journal: Oncologist Date: 2011-12-06
Authors: Joe Y Chang; Salma K Jabbour; Dirk De Ruysscher; Steven E Schild; Charles B Simone; Ramesh Rengan; Steven Feigenberg; Atif J Khan; Noah C Choi; Jeffrey D Bradley; Xiaorong R Zhu; Antony J Lomax; Bradford S Hoppe Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-01-23 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Everett E Vokes; James E Herndon; Michael J Kelley; M Giulia Cicchetti; Nithya Ramnath; Harvey Neill; James N Atkins; Dorothy M Watson; Wallace Akerley; Mark R Green Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-04-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Walter J Curran; Rebecca Paulus; Corey J Langer; Ritsuko Komaki; Jin S Lee; Stephen Hauser; Benjamin Movsas; Todd Wasserman; Seth A Rosenthal; Elizabeth Gore; Mitchell Machtay; William Sause; James D Cox Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2011-09-08 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: G C Barnett; S L Kerns; D J Noble; A M Dunning; C M L West; N G Burnet Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2015-07-10 Impact factor: 4.126
Authors: Scott J Antonia; Augusto Villegas; Davey Daniel; David Vicente; Shuji Murakami; Rina Hui; Takashi Yokoi; Alberto Chiappori; Ki H Lee; Maike de Wit; Byoung C Cho; Maryam Bourhaba; Xavier Quantin; Takaaki Tokito; Tarek Mekhail; David Planchard; Young-Chul Kim; Christos S Karapetis; Sandrine Hiret; Gyula Ostoros; Kaoru Kubota; Jhanelle E Gray; Luis Paz-Ares; Javier de Castro Carpeño; Catherine Wadsworth; Giovanni Melillo; Haiyi Jiang; Yifan Huang; Phillip A Dennis; Mustafa Özgüroğlu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Arthur Jochems; Timo M Deist; Issam El Naqa; Marc Kessler; Chuck Mayo; Jackson Reeves; Shruti Jolly; Martha Matuszak; Randall Ten Haken; Johan van Soest; Cary Oberije; Corinne Faivre-Finn; Gareth Price; Dirk de Ruysscher; Philippe Lambin; Andre Dekker Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Aurélien Jongen; Florian Charlier; Kelsey Baker; John Chang; William Hartsell; George Laramore; Pranshu Mohindra; Luigi Moretti; Mary Redman; Lane Rosen; Henry Tsai; Dirk Van Gestel; Carlos Vargas; Ramesh Rengan Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-09-10