Husam Albarmawi1, Kevin J Cullen2, Ranee Mehra2, Eberechukwu Onukwugha1, Olga Goloubeva2. 1. Department of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. 2. University of Maryland Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine; Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Abstract
Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of definitive therapies for nonmetastatic oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Materials & methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset, patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 were identified. The cost-effectiveness of chemoradiation (CRT) versus radiotherapy (RT), cetuximab plus RT (cetuximab-RT) versus RT and cetuximab-RT versus CRT were estimated. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CRT compared with RT from 2000 to 2005 was US$56,650 (95% CI: US$4,522-$288,688) per additional year of survival. CRT was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. Cetuximab-RT was dominated by RT and CRT. Conclusion: CRT had a favorable value from 2000 to 2005 but was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. The value of cetuximab-RT compared with RT/CRT was not favorable with similar/inferior survival and substantial incremental costs.
Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of definitive therapies for nonmetastatic oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Materials & methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset, patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 were identified. The cost-effectiveness of chemoradiation (CRT) versus radiotherapy (RT), cetuximab plus RT (cetuximab-RT) versus RT and cetuximab-RT versus CRT were estimated. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CRT compared with RT from 2000 to 2005 was US$56,650 (95% CI: US$4,522-$288,688) per additional year of survival. CRT was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. Cetuximab-RT was dominated by RT and CRT. Conclusion: CRT had a favorable value from 2000 to 2005 but was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. The value of cetuximab-RT compared with RT/CRT was not favorable with similar/inferior survival and substantial incremental costs.
Entities:
Keywords:
chemotherapy; cost analysis; cost–effectiveness analysis; head and neck cancer; oropharyngeal cancer
Authors: G Calais; M Alfonsi; E Bardet; C Sire; T Germain; P Bergerot; B Rhein; J Tortochaux; P Oudinot; P Bertrand Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-12-15 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Joseph E Tota; Ana F Best; Zachary S Zumsteg; Maura L Gillison; Philip S Rosenberg; Anil K Chaturvedi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-04-26 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hisham Mehanna; Tom Beech; Tom Nicholson; Iman El-Hariry; Christopher McConkey; Vinidh Paleri; Sally Roberts Journal: Head Neck Date: 2012-01-20 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: N van der Linden; C W M van Gils; C P Pescott; J Buter; M R Vergeer; C A Uyl-de Groot Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Maura L Gillison; Andy M Trotti; Jonathan Harris; Avraham Eisbruch; Paul M Harari; David J Adelstein; Richard C K Jordan; Weiqiang Zhao; Erich M Sturgis; Barbara Burtness; John A Ridge; Jolie Ringash; James Galvin; Min Yao; Shlomo A Koyfman; Dukagjin M Blakaj; Mohammed A Razaq; A Dimitrios Colevas; Jonathan J Beitler; Christopher U Jones; Neal E Dunlap; Samantha A Seaward; Sharon Spencer; Thomas J Galloway; Jack Phan; James J Dignam; Quynh Thu Le Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Lawrence Koutcher; Eric Sherman; Matthew Fury; Suzanne Wolden; Zhigang Zhang; Qianxing Mo; Laschelle Stewart; Karen Schupak; Daphna Gelblum; Richard Wong; Dennis Kraus; Jatin Shah; Michael Zelefsky; David Pfister; Nancy Lee Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-10-13 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Michael Xiang; F Christopher Holsinger; A Dimitrios Colevas; Michelle M Chen; Quynh-Thu Le; Beth M Beadle Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-10-17 Impact factor: 6.860