RETRACTED: Cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy and dostarlimab for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal). This article has been retracted at the request of the Authors. The authors have independently identified an error in the formula that was utilized to calculate the Quality Adjusted Life Years which invalidates the data and the conclusion of the paper. The authors have contacted the journal requesting to retract the article. Apologies are offered to the readers of the journal for any confusion or inconvenience that may have resulted from the publication of this article.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in the patients with advanced previously treated endometrial cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis in the United States and in China.

PURPOSE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (LP) compared to chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for advanced endometrial cancer (EC) from the United States and Chinese payers' perspective. METHODS: In this economic evaluation, a partitioned survival model was constructed from the perspective of the United States and Chinese payers. The survival data were derived from the clinical trial (309-KEYNOTE-775), while costs and utility values were sourced from databases and published literature. Total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were estimated. The robustness of the model was evaluated through sensitivity analyses, and price adjustment scenario analyses was also performed. RESULTS: Base-case analysis indicated that LP wouldn't be cost-effective in the United States at the WTP threshold of $200 000, with improved effectiveness of 0.75 QALYs and an additional cost of $398596.81 (ICER $531392.20). While LP was cost-effective in China, with improved effectiveness of 0.75 QALYs and an increased overall cost of $62270.44 (ICER $83016.29). Sensitivity analyses revealed that the above results were stable. The scenario analyses results indicated that LP was cost-effective in the United States when the prices of lenvatinib and pembrolizumab were simultaneously reduced by 61.95% ($26.5361/mg for lenvatinib and $19.1532/mg for pembrolizumab). CONCLUSION: LP isn't cost-effective in the patients with advanced previously treated endometrial cancer in the United States, whereas it is cost-effective in China. The evidence-based pricing strategy provided by this study could benefit decision-makers in making optimal decisions and clinicians in general clinical practice. More evidence about budget impact and affordability for patients is needed.

Impact of different follow-up regimens on health-related quality of life and costs in endometrial cancer patients: Results from the TOTEM randomized trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether intensive follow-up (INT) after surgery for endometrial cancer impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and healthcare costs compared to minimalist follow-up (MIN), in the absence of evidence supporting any benefit on 5-year overall survival. METHODS: In the TOTEM trial, HRQoL was assessed using the SF-12 and the Psychological General Well-Being (PGWB) questionnaires at baseline, after 6 and 12 months and then annually up to 5 years of follow-up. Costs were analyzed after 4 years of follow-up from a National Health Service perspective, stratified by risk level. The probability of missing data was analyzed for both endpoints. RESULTS: 1847 patients were included in the analyses. The probability of missing data was not influenced by the study arms (MIN vs INT OR: 0.97 95%CI: 0.87-1.08). Longitudinal changes in HRQoL scores did not differ between the two follow-up regimens (MIN vs INT SF-12 PCS: -0.573, CI95%: -1.31; 0.16; SF-12 MCS: -0.243, CI95%: -1.08; 0.59; PGWB: -0.057, CI95%: -0,88; 0,77). The mean cost difference between the intensive and minimalist arm was €531 for low-risk patients and €683 for high-risk patients. CONCLUSION: In the follow-up of endometrial cancer after surgery, a minimalist treatment regimen did not affect quality of life and was cost-saving in both low-risk and high-risk recurrence patients. As previous results showed no survival benefit, a minimalist approach is justified. The relevant proportion of missing data on secondary outcomes of interest could be a critical point that deserves special attention.

Treatment patterns and economic burden among newly diagnosed cervical and endometrial cancer patients.

Aim: This study evaluated treatment patterns, healthcare resource use and healthcare costs among newly diagnosed US patients with cervical or endometrial cancer. Materials & methods: The authors identified patients diagnosed between 2015 and 2018, described them by line of therapy (LOT), then summarized all-cause per patient per month healthcare resource use and healthcare costs per LOT. Results: Among 1004 patients with cervical cancer and 2006 patients with endometrial cancer, 65.2 and 71.4%, respectively, received at least LOT1. Common treatment modalities in LOT1 were surgery (cervical, 58.0%; endometrial, 92.6%), radiation therapy (cervical, 49.8%; 24.7%) and systemic therapy (cervical, 53.3%; endometrial, 26.1%). Mean per patient per month costs per LOT were pre-treatment (cervical, US$17,210; endometrial, US$14,601), LOT1 (cervical, US$10,929; endometrial, US$6859), LOT2 (cervical, US$15,183; endometrial, US$10,649) and LOT3+ (cervical, US$19,681; endometrial, US$9206). Conclusion: Overall, newly diagnosed patients with cervical or endometrial cancer received guideline-recommended treatment. Outpatient visits mainly drove healthcare costs across LOTs.

Treatment patterns and economic burden among cervical and endometrial cancer patients newly initiating systemic therapy.

Aim: To evaluate treatment patterns, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and all-cause healthcare costs among patients with cervical or endometrial cancer newly initiating systemic therapy. Methods: We identified patients with cervical or endometrial cancer newly initiating systemic therapy - a claims-based proxy for advanced disease - between 2014 and 2019, described them by line of therapy (LOT), and summarized the per patient per month (PPPM) HCRU and healthcare costs per LOT. Results: Among 1229 patients with cervical cancer and 2659 patients with endometrial cancer, LOT1 therapies included systemic only (cervical, 50.1%; endometrial, 83.2%) and systemic with radiation therapy (cervical, 49.9%; endometrial, 16.8%). Mean PPPM total costs were: LOT1 (cervical, US$15,892; endometrial, US$11,363), LOT2 (US$20,193; US$14,019) and LOT3+ (US$16,576; US$14,645). Conclusions: Overall, patients received guideline-concordant care and experienced significant economic burden, which increased with LOT.

A prospective comparison of costs between robotics, laparoscopy, and laparotomy in endometrial cancer among women with Class III obesity or higher.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the immediate operating room (OR), inpatient, and overall costs between three surgical modalities among women with endometrial cancer (EC) and Class III obesity or higher. METHODS: A multicentre prospective observational study examined outcomes of women, with early stage EC, treated surgically. Resource use was collected for OR costs including OR time, equipment, and inpatient costs. Median OR, inpatient, and overall costs across surgical modalities were analyzed using an Independent-Samples Kruskal-Wallis Test among patients with BMI ≥ 40. RESULTS: Out of 520 women, 103 had a BMI ≥ 40. Among women with BMI ≥ 40: median OR costs were $4197.02 for laparotomy, $5524.63 for non-robotic assisted laparoscopy, and $7225.16 for robotic-assisted laparoscopy (p < 0.001) and median inpatient costs were $5584.28 for laparotomy, $3042.07 for non-robotic assisted laparoscopy, and $1794.51 for robotic-assisted laparoscopy (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in the median overall costs: $10 291.50 for laparotomy, $8412.63 for non-robotic assisted laparoscopy, and $9002.48 for robotic-assisted laparoscopy (p = 0.185). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in overall costs between the three surgical modalities in patient with BMI ≥ 40. Given the similar costs, any form of minimally invasive surgery should be promoted in this population.

Post robotic investment: Cost consequences and impact on length of stay for obese women with endometrial cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to investigate whether robotic-assisted surgery is associated with lower incremental resource use among obese patients relative to non-obese patients after a Danish nationwide adoption of robotic-assisted surgery in women with early-stage endometrial cancer. This is a population-based cohort study based on registers and clinical data. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All women who underwent surgery (robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy) from 2008 to 2015 were included and divided according to body mass index (<30 and ≥30). Robotic-assisted surgery was gradually introduced in Denmark (2008-2013). We compared resource use post-surgery in obese vs non-obese women who underwent surgery before and after a nationwide adoption of robotic-assisted surgery. The key exposure variable was exposure to robotic-assisted surgery. Clinical and sociodemographic data were linked with national register data to determine costs and bed days 12 months before and after surgery applying difference-in-difference analyses. RESULTS: In total, 3934 women were included. The adoption of robotic-assisted surgery did not demonstrate statistically significant implications for total costs among obese women (€3,417; 95% confidence interval [CI] -€854 to €7,688, p = 0.117). Further, for obese women, a statistically significant reduction in bed days related to the index hospitalization was demonstrated (-1.9 bed days; 95% CI -3.6 to -0.2, p = 0.025). However, for non-obese women, the adoption of robotic-assisted surgery was associated with statistically significant total costs increments of €9,333 (95% CI €3,729-€1,4936, p = 0.001) and no reduction in bed days related to the index hospitalization was observed (+0.9 bed days; 95% CI -0.6 to 2.3, p = 0.242). CONCLUSIONS: The national investment in robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer seems to have more modest cost implications post-surgery for obese women. This may be partly driven by a significant reduction in bed days related to the index hospitalization among obese women, as well as reductions in subsequent hospitalizations.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in advanced recurrent endometrial cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (LP) in patients with microsatellite stable (MSS), recurrent, pretreated endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS: A decision analysis model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of LP relative to doxorubicin, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), and bevacizumab in patients with recurrent pretreated MSS EC. Published data was used to estimate quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and drug cost estimates were obtained using average wholesale prices. A health state utility (HSU) penalty of -0.10 was applied to the LP group to account for treatment toxicity. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to determine cost/QALY. The willingness to pay threshold (WTP) was set at $100,000 per QALY saved. Sensitivity analyses were performed on cost, effectiveness, and HSU penalty for LP. RESULTS: Costs of treatment with doxorubicin, PLD, and bevacizumab are $23.7 million (M), $56.9 M, and $250.8 M respectively. Cost of treatment with LP is $1.8 billion. Relative to doxorubicin, the ICERs for PLD, bevacizumab, and LP are $56,808, $345,824, and $1.6 M respectively. A sensitivity analysis varying the cost of LP shows that if the combined drug cost decreases from over $58,000 to less than $11,000 per cycle, this strategy would be cost-effective. Eliminating the HSU penalty for LP decreased the ICER $1.0 M while increasing the penalty to -0.20 increased the ICER to $3.7 M. CONCLUSIONS: LP is not cost-effective in patients with recurrent pretreated, MSS EC. A dramatic reduction in cost of LP is required for this novel strategy to be cost-effective.

Pembrolizumab and lenvatinib versus carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: A Markov analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab/lenvatinib (P/L) versus standard-of-care carboplatin/paclitaxel (C/T) as first-line systemic therapy for patients with advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer. METHODS: We designed a Markov model to simulate treatment outcomes for advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer patients whose tumors are either microsatellite stable (MSS) or have high microsatellite instability (MSI-high). We adopted a healthcare sector perspective for the analysis. Model inputs for costs, health utility, and clinical estimates were obtained from the literature including data from GOG0209 and KEYNOTE-146. Primary outcomes included costs of care, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The time-horizon was three years and the discount rate was 3% annually. RESULTS: In a MSS cohort, compared to C/T, first-line treatment with P/L increased treatment costs by $212,670 and decreased QALYs by 0.28 per patient. In a MSI-high cohort, compared to C/T, P/L increased costs by $313,487 and increased QALYs by 0.11 per patient, representing an ICER of $2,849,882 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses found that the price of the new drugs was the most important determinant of the ICER and that the price of the new drugs would need to decrease by 85% to $2817 per cycle to reach a $150,000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSION: In the MSS model, we found that first-line therapy for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer with P/L increased costs and worsened outcomes compared to C/T. In the MSI-high model, P/L improved survival and QALYs compared to C/T but was not cost-effective at the current cost of the drugs.

The levonorgestrel intrauterine system for prevention of endometrial cancer in women with obesity: A cost-effectiveness study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) as an endometrial cancer prevention strategy in women with obesity. METHODS: A Markov decision-analytic model was used to compare 5 strategies in women with a body mass index of 30 or greater: 1) Usual care 2) LNG-IUS for 5 years 3) LNG-IUS for 7 years 4) LNG-IUS for 5 years, replaced once for a total of 10 years 5) LNG-IUS for 7 years, replaced once for a total of 14 years. Obesity was presumed to be associated with a 3-fold relative risk of endometrial cancer incidence and a 2.65-fold disease-specific mortality. The LNG-IUS was assumed to confer a 50% reduction in cancer incidence over the period of the LNG-IUS insertion. Outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, calculated in 2019 Canadian dollars (CAD) per year of life saved. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The LNG-IUS strategy was considered cost-effective if the cost of the intervention is less than $66,400 CAD ($50,000 US dollars) per year of life saved. The strategy becomes cost-effective if the LNG-IUS is inserted at age 57 (strategy #2), at age 52 for strategy #3, at age 51 for strategy #4 and at age 45 for strategy #5, when compared to usual care. The results are stable to variations in cost but sensitive to the estimated risk reduction of the LNG-IUS and the impact of obesity on endometrial cancer incidence and disease-specific mortality. CONCLUSION: The LNG-IUS is a cost-effective method of endometrial cancer prevention in women with obesity.

Socioeconomic inequality and omission of adjuvant radiation therapy in high-risk, early-stage endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Gaps in access to appropriate cancer care, and associated cancer mortality, have widened across socioeconomic groups. We examined whether demographic and socioeconomic factors influenced receipt of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in patients with high-risk, early-stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study cohort was selected from 349,404 endometrial carcinoma patients from the National Cancer Database in whom adjuvant RT would be recommended per national guidelines. The study included surgically treated patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer with one of the following criteria: 1) FIGO 2009 stage IB, grade 1/2 disease, age ≥ 60 years; 2) stage IB, grade 3 disease; or 3) stage II disease. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with omission of adjuvant RT. Association between adjuvant RT, covariables, and overall survival (OS) was assessed with multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: 19,594 patients were eligible for analysis; 47% did not receive adjuvant RT. Omission of adjuvant RT was more prevalent among African-American, Hispanic, and Asian compared to non-Hispanic white patients (OR 0.79, 95%CI: 0.69-0.91; OR 0.75, 95%CI: 0.64-0.87; OR 0.75, 95%CI: 0.60-0.94, respectively). Lower median household income of patient's area of residence, lack of health insurance, treatment at non-academic hospitals, farther distance to treatment facilities, and residence in metropolitan counties were associated with omission of adjuvant RT. Such omission was independently associated with worse OS (HR1.43, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Adjuvant RT is omitted in 47% of patients with early-stage, high-risk endometrial cancer, which is associated with poor access to appropriate, high-quality care and worse outcome.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of three approaches for lymph node assessment in patients with low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of sentinel lymph node mapping compared to risk factor assessment and routine full lymph node dissection for the assessment of lymph nodes in patients with low- and intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial cancer. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was designed to compare three lymph node assessment strategies in terms of costs and effects: 1) sentinel lymph node mapping; 2) post-operative risk factor assessment (adjuvant therapy based on clinical and histological risk factors); 3) full lymph node dissection. Input data were derived from systematic literature searches and expert opinion. QALYs were used as measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed with sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Base-case analysis showed that sentinel lymph node mapping was the most effective strategy for lymph node assessment in patients with low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancer. Compared to risk factor assessment it was more costly, but the incremental cost effectiveness ratio stayed below a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 with a maximum of €9637/QALY. Sentinel lymph node mapping was dominant compared to lymph node dissection since it was more effective and less costly. Sensitivity analyses showed that the outcome of the model was robust to changes in input values. With a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 sentinel lymph node mapping remained cost-effective in at least 74.3% of the iterations. CONCLUSION: Sentinel lymph node mapping is the most cost-effective strategy to guide the need for adjuvant therapy in patients with low and intermediate risk endometrioid endometrial cancer.

Hysterectomy Versus Hysteropexy at the Time of Native Tissue Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether a hysterectomy at the time of native tissue pelvic organ prolapse repair is cost-effective for the prevention of endometrial cancer. METHODS: We created a decision analysis model using TreeAge Pro. We modeled prolapse recurrence after total vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension (TVH-USLS) versus sacrospinous ligament fixation hysteropexy (SSLF-HPXY). We modeled incidence and diagnostic evaluation of postmenopausal bleeding, including risk of endometrial pathology and diagnosis or death from endometrial cancer. Modeled costs included those associated with the index procedure, subsequent prolapse repair, endometrial biopsy, pelvic ultrasound, hysteroscopy, dilation and curettage, and treatment of endometrial cancer. RESULTS: TVH-USLS costs US $587.61 more than SSLF-HPXY per case of prolapse. TVH-USLS prevents 1.1% of women from experiencing postmenopausal bleeding and its diagnostic workup. It prevents 0.95% of women from undergoing subsequent major surgery for the treatment of either prolapse recurrence or suspected endometrial cancer. Using our model, it costs US $2,698,677 to prevent one cancer death by performing TVH-USLS. As this is lower than the value of a statistical life, it is cost-effective to perform TVH-USLS for cancer prevention. Multiple 1-way sensitivity analyses showed that changes to input variables would not significantly change outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: TVH-USLS increased costs but reduced postmenopausal bleeding and subsequent major surgery compared with SSLF-HPXY. Accounting for these differences, TVH-USLS was a cost-effective approach for the prevention of endometrial cancer. Uterine preservation/removal at the time of prolapse repair should be based on the woman's history and treatment priorities, but cancer prevention should be one aspect of this decision.

Employment disruption following the diagnosis of endometrial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oncologic treatment has been associated with unemployment. As endometrial cancer is highly curable, it is important to assess whether patients experience employment disruption after treatment. We evaluated the frequency of employment change following endometrial cancer diagnosis and assessed factors associated with it. METHODS: A cohort of patients 18-63 years-old who were diagnosed with endometrial cancer (January 2009-December 2017) were identified in the Truven MarketScan database, an insurance claims database of commercially insured patients in the United States. All patients who were working full- or part-time at diagnosis were included and all employment changes during the year following diagnosis were identified. Clinical information, including use of chemotherapy and radiation, were identified using Common Procedural Terminology codes, and International Statistical Classification of Diseases codes. Cox proportional hazards models incorporating measured covariates were used to evaluate the impact of treatment and demographic variables on change in employment status. RESULTS: A total of 4381 women diagnosed with endometrial cancer who held a full-time or part-time job 12 months prior to diagnosis were identified. Median age at diagnosis was 55 and a minority of patients received adjuvant therapy; 7.9% received chemotherapy, 4.9% received external-beam radiation therapy, and 4.1% received chemoradiation. While most women continued to work following diagnosis, 21.7% (950) experienced a change in employment status. The majority (97.7%) of patients had a full-time job prior to diagnosis. In a multivariable analysis controlling for age, region of residence, comorbidities, insurance plan type and presence of adverse events, chemoradiation recipients were 34% more likely to experience an employment change (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01-1.78), compared to those who only underwent surgery. CONCLUSION: Approximately 22% of women with employer-subsidized health insurance experienced a change in employment status following the diagnosis of endometrial cancer, an often-curable disease. Chemoradiation was an independent predictor of change in employment.

Robotic vs. open surgery in obese women with low-grade endometrial cancer: comparison of costs and quality of life measures.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective study compared perioperative measures, costs, quality of life and survival after open vs. robotic surgery, among obese women diagnosed with low-grade endometrial cancer. METHODS: Obese women (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30) who underwent open or robotic surgery for endometrial cancer, in one of two tertiary medical centers in the center of Israel, 2013-2016, postoperative grade 1-2, were included. Costs per patient, including 30-days post-surgery were calculated. Quality of life was evaluated by Physical and Mental Components of the SF-36 and a recovery from surgery questionnaire. Overall survival outcomes were obtained from patients' files. Surgical outcomes, including operating and anesthesia times, length of hospital stay, and intraoperative and postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification scale were reviewed. RESULTS: In all, 138 women with BMI ≥30 underwent open (n = 61) or robotic surgery (n = 77) during the study period. The groups had similar BMI, comorbidities, demographics and tumor characteristics. Robotic surgery was associated with shorter hospital stays (mean 1.7 vs. 4.8 days; P < .0001) and fewer postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo > 2, 5.2% vs. 19.7%; P = .0008), but longer operating theater time (3.8 vs. 2.8 h; P < .001). Costs are equivalent when at least 350 robotic surgeries are performed annually, not including the initial system costs. Quality of life measures were better after robotic surgery. SF-36 showed better measures for robotic surgery (Physical 56 vs. 39 and Mental 73 vs. 56; P < .01). After robotic surgery, patients tended to recover quicker when compared to open surgery, as they returned to normal activities earlier, with less need for family and governmental assistance (mean recovery time, 23 vs. 70 days; P < 0.006 and mean change in preoperative total functioning score, - 1.5 vs. -3.9: P < 0.05, respectively). Overall, 5-year survival was 89.8% for the open surgery group vs. 94% for the robotic surgery group (log rank, P = 0.330). CONCLUSIONS: Obese women with low-grade endometrial cancer had better quality of life after robotic vs. open surgery. They also had shorter hospital stays and fewer postoperative complications. Centers with high volumes of robotic surgery can achieve similar costs when comparing both methods. These results were achieved without jeopardizing survival. Our results further emphasize the need for the Israeli healthcare system to include specific reimbursement for robotic procedures in the population we studied.

Where you live matters: A National Cancer Database study of Medicaid expansion and endometrial cancer outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine associations between adoption of Medicaid expansion (ME) and changes in insurance status, early stage diagnosis, and cancer survival among women with endometrial carcinoma (EC). METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients diagnosed with EC between the age 40-64 from 2004 to 2015. Difference-in-differences analysis quantified the impact of ME on the proportion of new EC diagnoses with insurance (vs. uninsured), the proportion diagnosed with stage I (vs. II-IV), and overall survival. RESULTS: 156,253 patients were included. Among 65,019 women living in ME states, ME is associated with an increase in the percent of EC cases who are insured of 1.4% (95% CI 0.9-2.0%, p < 0.0001), with strongest effects among Hispanic women, women in the lowest income quartile, and women in the second age quartile (age 53-57). There was no overall impact of ME on stage, though an increase of early stage diagnoses by 2.4% (95% CI 0.3-4.5%, p = 0.022) was observed among women age 53-57. There was a trend towards improved overall survival with ME, which was strongest in women age 53-57 (HR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.99, p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with EC, ME positively impacted insurance coverage, an important hurdle in accessing health care. In women aged 53-57, ME was associated with earlier stage at diagnosis and improved survival, suggesting that the magnitude of the improvement in insurance coverage may correlate with important clinical outcomes. Efforts should continue to understand the complexity of barriers to health care access and to develop effective strategies to surmount them.

Patient-initiated follow-up for low-risk endometrial cancer: a cost-analysis evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Risk stratification has resulted in patient-initiated follow-up being introduced for low-risk endometrial cancer in place of routine hospital follow-up. The financial benefit to the patient and the healthcare economy of patient-initiated follow-up, as compared with hospital follow-up, has yet to be explored. In this study, we explored the potential impact for both the healthcare economy and patients of patient-initiated follow-up. METHODS: Women diagnosed with low-risk endometrial cancer enrolled on a patient-initiated follow-up scheme between November 2014 and September 2018 were included. Data on the number of telephone calls to the nurse specialists and clinic appointments attended were collected prospectively. The number of clinic appointments that would have taken place if the patient had continued on hospital follow-up, rather than starting on patient-initiated follow-up, was calculated and costs determined using standard National Health Service (NHS) reference costs. The time/distance traveled by patients from their home address to the hospital clinic was calculated and used to determine patient-related costs. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients with a median of 37 (range 2-62) months follow-up after primary surgery were enrolled on the scheme. In total, the cohort were scheduled to attend 1673 appointments with hospital follow-up, whereas they only attended 69 clinic appointments and made 107 telephone contacts with patient-initiated follow-up. There was a 93.5% reduction in costs from a projected £194 068.00 for hospital follow-up to £12 676.33 for patient-initiated follow-up. The mean patient-related costs were reduced by 95.6% with patient-initiated follow-up. The total mileage traveled by patients for hospital follow-up was 30 891.4 miles, which was associated with a mean traveling time per patient of 7.41 hours and clinic/waiting time of 7.5 hours compared with 1165.8 miles and 0.46 hours and 0.5 hours, respectively, for patient-initiated follow-up. CONCLUSION: The introduction of a patient self-management follow-up scheme for low-risk endometrial cancer was associated with financial/time saving to both the patient and the healthcare economy as compared with hospital follow-up.

Patient-initiated follow-up after treatment for low risk endometrial cancer: a prospective audit of outcomes and cost benefits.

OBJECTIVE: Recurrence of low-risk endometrioid endometrial cancer is rare, and traditional hospital follow-up has a cost to both the patient and the healthcare system, without evidence of benefit. We examined the uptake of patient-initiated follow-up, pattern of recurrences, and survival for women following surgical treatment of low-risk endometrial cancer and compared estimated costs with hospital follow-up. METHODS: This study was a prospective audit of outcomes following implementation of a patient-initiated follow-up policy in a UK-based gynecological cancer center for women with low-risk endometrial cancer treated surgically (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage 1A, G1-2) from January 2010 to December 2015. Women were identified following multidisciplinary team meetings and data were collected from the electronic cancer register, paper, and electronic clinical records. Health service costs were calculated based on standard tariffs for follow-up appointments; patient costs were estimated from mileage traveled from home postcode and parking charges. Progression-free survival and overall survival were assessed. Estimated financial costs to the health service and patients of hospital follow-up were compared with actual patient-initiated follow-up costs. RESULTS: A total of 129 women were offered patient-initiated follow-up (declined by four; accepted by another 11 after hospital follow-up for 6 months to 3.5 years) with median follow-up of 60.7 months (range 1.4-109.1 months). Ten women recurred: four vaginal vault recurrences (all salvaged), three pelvic recurrences (all salvaged), and three distant metastatic disease (all died). Five-year disease-specific survival was 97.3%. Ten women in the cohort died: three from endometrial cancer and seven from unrelated causes. The cost saving to the health service of patient-initiated follow-up compared with a traditional hospital follow-up regimen was £116 403 (median £988.60 per patient,range £0-£1071). Patients saved an estimated £7122 in transport and parking costs (median £57.22 per patient,range £4.98-£147.70). CONCLUSION: Patient-initiated follow-up for low risk endometrial cancer has cost benefits to both health service and patients. Those with pelvic or vault recurrence had salvageable disease, despite patient-initiated follow-up.

Socioeconomic deprivation and survival in endometrial cancer: The effect of BMI.

OBJECTIVES: METHODS: This is a retrospective study of surgically managed endometrial cancer patients in the Royal Cornwall Hospital Truro between January 2006 and August 2017. Patient characteristics, overall survival, recurrence free survival and intra- and postoperative outcomes were evaluated across socioeconomic deprivation groups in which socioeconomic deprivation was measured with the English Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). RESULTS: In total, we identified 831 women, of which 690 were included. The median age was 66 years with a median BMI of 31 and the majority of tumours were endometrioid tumours (80.1%). For type 1 (endometrioid) tumours, better survival was seen in the least deprived patients, however this was not significant in a multivariate analysis and only age, stage and BMI remained significant. For type 2 (all other) tumours, no association between survival and socioeconomic deprivation was found and only stage was significant. However, more affluent patients had significantly higher recurrence rates. In addition, we did not find evidence of an association between intra- or post-operative complication rates and socioeconomic deprivation. CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic deprivation is associated with survival in endometrial cancer patients, however after adjusting for confounders this association does not remain. Only age, stage and BMI are independent prognostic factors for survival. In addition, there is no evidence of association between socioeconomic deprivation and peri-operative outcomes in endometrial cancer patients.