A van der Hout1,2, F Jansen1,2,3, C F van Uden-Kraan1,2, V M Coupé4, K Holtmaat1,2,3, G A Nieuwenhuijzen5, J A Hardillo6, R J Baatenburg de Jong6, N L Tiren-Verbeet7, D W Sommeijer8,9, K de Heer8,10, C G Schaar11, R J E Sedee12, K Bosscha13, M W M van den Brekel14, J F Petersen14, M Westerman15, J Honings16, R P Takes16, I Houtenbos17, W T van den Broek18, R de Bree19, P Jansen20, S E J Eerenstein2,3, C R Leemans3, J M Zijlstra2,21, P Cuijpers1, L V van de Poll-Franse22,23,24, I M Verdonck-de Leeuw25,26,27. 1. Department of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Cancer Center Amsterdam (CCA), Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, ErasmusMC Cancer Centre, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Hematology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Internal Medicine, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands. 9. Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 10. Department of Hematology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 11. Department of Internal Medicine, Gelre ziekenhuis, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands. 12. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Haaglanden MC, The Hague, The Netherlands. 13. Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis, Den Bosch, The Netherlands. 14. Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 15. Department of Hematology, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, The Netherlands. 16. Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 17. Department of Hematology, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands. 18. Department of Surgery, St. Anna Hospital, Geldrop, The Netherlands. 19. Department of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology, Utrecht University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 20. Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands. 21. Department of Hematology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 22. Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. 23. Division of Psychosocial Research & Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 24. CoRPS - Center of Research on Psychological and Somatic disorders, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands. 25. Department of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. im.verdonck@amsterdamumc.nl. 26. Cancer Center Amsterdam (CCA), Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. im.verdonck@amsterdamumc.nl. 27. Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. im.verdonck@amsterdamumc.nl.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The eHealth self-management application 'Oncokompas' was developed to support cancer survivors in monitoring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and symptoms, and obtaining personalized feedback and options for supportive care. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-utility of Oncokompas compared with care as usual (CAU) among cancer survivors. METHODS: Survivors were randomly allocated to the intervention or control group. Direct (non-)medical, indirect non-medical costs, and HRQOL were measured at 3- and 6-month follow-up, using iMTA Medical Consumption and Productivity Costs and the EuroQol-5D questionnaires. Mean cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were compared between both groups. RESULTS: In total, 625 survivors were randomized into intervention (n = 320) or control group (n = 305). Base case analysis showed that incremental costs from a societal perspective were - €163 (95% CI, - 665 to 326), and incremental QALYs were 0.0017 (95% CI, - 0.0121 to 0.0155) in the intervention group compared with those in the control group. The probability that, compared with CAU, Oncokompas is more effective was 60%, less costly 73%, and both more effective and less costly 47%. Sensitivity analyses showed that incremental costs vary between - €40 and €69, and incremental QALYs vary between - 0.0023 and - 0.0057. CONCLUSION: Oncokompas is likely to be equally effective on utilities, and not more expensive than CAU, and will therefore contribute to sustainable cancer survivorship care in a (cost-)effective manner. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Oncokompas seems to improve HRQOL and reduces the burden of several tumour-specific symptoms, while costs from a societal perspective are similar to CAU.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The eHealth self-management application 'Oncokompas' was developed to support cancer survivors in monitoring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and symptoms, and obtaining personalized feedback and options for supportive care. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-utility of Oncokompas compared with care as usual (CAU) among cancer survivors. METHODS: Survivors were randomly allocated to the intervention or control group. Direct (non-)medical, indirect non-medical costs, and HRQOL were measured at 3- and 6-month follow-up, using iMTA Medical Consumption and Productivity Costs and the EuroQol-5D questionnaires. Mean cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were compared between both groups. RESULTS: In total, 625 survivors were randomized into intervention (n = 320) or control group (n = 305). Base case analysis showed that incremental costs from a societal perspective were - €163 (95% CI, - 665 to 326), and incremental QALYs were 0.0017 (95% CI, - 0.0121 to 0.0155) in the intervention group compared with those in the control group. The probability that, compared with CAU, Oncokompas is more effective was 60%, less costly 73%, and both more effective and less costly 47%. Sensitivity analyses showed that incremental costs vary between - €40 and €69, and incremental QALYs vary between - 0.0023 and - 0.0057. CONCLUSION: Oncokompas is likely to be equally effective on utilities, and not more expensive than CAU, and will therefore contribute to sustainable cancer survivorship care in a (cost-)effective manner. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Oncokompas seems to improve HRQOL and reduces the burden of several tumour-specific symptoms, while costs from a societal perspective are similar to CAU.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer survivorship; Cost-utility; Quality of life; Self-management; Supportive care; eHealth
Authors: Liza van Deursen; Anke Versluis; Rosalie van der Vaart; Lucille Standaar; Jeroen Struijs; Niels Chavannes; Jiska J Aardoom Journal: JMIR Cancer Date: 2022-06-14
Authors: Chris Gibbons; Ian Porter; Daniela C Gonçalves-Bradley; Stanimir Stoilov; Ignacio Ricci-Cabello; Elena Tsangaris; Jaheeda Gangannagaripalli; Antoinette Davey; Elizabeth J Gibbons; Anna Kotzeva; Jonathan Evans; Philip J van der Wees; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Joanne Greenhalgh; Peter Bower; Jordi Alonso; Jose M Valderas Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-10-12
Authors: A van der Hout; C F van Uden-Kraan; K Holtmaat; F Jansen; B I Lissenberg-Witte; G A P Nieuwenhuijzen; J A Hardillo; R J Baatenburg de Jong; N L Tiren-Verbeet; D W Sommeijer; K de Heer; C G Schaar; R J E Sedee; K Bosscha; M W M van den Brekel; J F Petersen; M Westerman; J Honings; R P Takes; I Houtenbos; W T van den Broek; R de Bree; P Jansen; S E J Eerenstein; C R Leemans; J M Zijlstra; P Cuijpers; L V van de Poll-Franse; I M Verdonck-de Leeuw Journal: Internet Interv Date: 2021-07-15
Authors: Carolyn Ee; Anna C Singleton; Michael de Manincor; Elisabeth Elder; Nikki Davis; Christine Mitchell; Tinashe Dune; Freya MacMillan; Kate McBride; Suzanne Grant Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2022 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.077
Authors: Josianne C H B M Luijten; Linda Brom; Pauline A J Vissers; Yes A J van de Wouw; Fabienne A R M Warmerdam; Joos Heisterkamp; Stella Mook; Jamal Oulad Hadj; Marc J van Det; Liesbeth Timmermans; Maarten C C M Hulshof; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Camiel Rosman; Peter D Siersema; Marjan J Westerman; Rob H A Verhoeven; Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2022-02-15 Impact factor: 4.711
Authors: Anouk S Schuit; Karen Holtmaat; Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte; Simone E J Eerenstein; Josée M Zijlstra; Corien Eeltink; Annemarie Becker-Commissaris; Lia van Zuylen; Myra E van Linde; C Willemien Menke-van der Houven van Oordt; Dirkje W Sommeijer; Nol Verbeek; Koop Bosscha; Rishi Nandoe Tewarie; Robert-Jan Sedee; Remco de Bree; Alexander de Graeff; Filip de Vos; Pim Cuijpers; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw Journal: Lancet Reg Health Eur Date: 2022-04-21
Authors: Anouk S Schuit; Karen Holtmaat; Veerle M H Coupé; Simone E J Eerenstein; Josée M Zijlstra; Corien Eeltink; Annemarie Becker-Commissaris; Lia van Zuylen; Myra E van Linde; C Willemien Menke-van der Houven van Oordt; Dirkje W Sommeijer; Nol Verbeek; Koop Bosscha; Rishi Nandoe Tewarie; Robert-Jan Sedee; Remco de Bree; Alexander de Graeff; Filip de Vos; Pim Cuijpers; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw; Femke Jansen Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-08-27 Impact factor: 3.109