Noemi Muszbek1, Edit Remak2, Rachel Evans1, Victoria K Brennan3, Fabien Colaone3, Suki Shergill3, Damian Mullan4, Paul J Ross5. 1. Visible Analytics, Oxford, OX2 0DP, UK. 2. Visible Analytics, Budapest, 1025, Hungary. 3. SIRTEX Medical United Kingdom Ltd, London, EC4A 3TR, UK. 4. The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK. 5. Department of Medical Oncology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, SE1 9RT, UK.
Abstract
Background: The study assessed the cost-utility of selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) with Y-90 resin microspheres versus sorafenib in UK patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma ineligible for transarterial chemoembolization. Materials & methods: A lifetime partitioned survival model was developed for patients with low tumor burden (≤25%) and good liver function (albumin-bilirubin grade 1). Efficacy, safety and quality of life data were from a European Phase III randomized controlled trial and published studies. Resource use was from registries and clinical surveys. Results: Discounted quality-adjusted life-years were 1.982 and 1.381, and discounted total costs were £29,143 and 30,927, for SIRT and sorafenib, respectively. Conclusion: SIRT has the potential to be a dominant (more efficacious/less costly) or cost-effective alternative to sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.
Background: The study assessed the cost-utility of selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) with Y-90 resin microspheres versus sorafenib in UK patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma ineligible for transarterial chemoembolization. Materials & methods: A lifetime partitioned survival model was developed for patients with low tumor burden (≤25%) and good liver function (albumin-bilirubin grade 1). Efficacy, safety and quality of life data were from a European Phase III randomized controlled trial and published studies. Resource use was from registries and clinical surveys. Results: Discounted quality-adjusted life-years were 1.982 and 1.381, and discounted total costs were £29,143 and 30,927, for SIRT and sorafenib, respectively. Conclusion: SIRT has the potential to be a dominant (more efficacious/less costly) or cost-effective alternative to sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.
Authors: J C Alonso; I Casans; F M González; D Fuster; A Rodríguez; N Sánchez; I Oyagüez; R Burgos; A O Williams; N Espinoza Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2022-07-02 Impact factor: 2.847