Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cost-utility comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus primary debulking surgery for treatment of advanced-stage ovarian cancer in patients 65 years old or older.
Rowland, Michelle R; Lesnock, Jamie L; Farris, Coreen; Kelley, Joseph L; Krivak, Thomas C.
Afiliação
  • Rowland MR; Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: Michelle-Rowland@ouhsc.edu.
  • Lesnock JL; Mid Atlantic Gynecologic Oncology of Mon General Hospital, Morgantown, WV.
  • Farris C; RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA.
  • Kelley JL; Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
  • Krivak TC; Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Western Pennsylvania Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 212(6): 763.e1-8, 2015 Jun.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25644442
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

Treatment for advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) includes primary debulking surgery (PDS) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). A randomized controlled trial comparing these treatments resulted in comparable overall survival (OS). Studies report more complications and lower chemotherapy completion rates in patients 65 years old or older receiving PDS. We sought to evaluate the cost implications of NACT relative to PDS in AEOC patients 65 years old or older. STUDY

DESIGN:

A 5 year Markov model was created. Arm 1 modeled PDS followed by 6 cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel (CT). Arm 2 modeled 3 cycles of CT, followed by interval debulking surgery and then 3 additional cycles of CT. Parameters included OS, surgical complications, probability of treatment initiation, treatment cost, and quality of life (QOL). OS was assumed to be equal based on the findings of the international randomized control trial. Differences in surgical complexity were accounted for in base surgical cost plus add-on procedure costs weighted by occurrence rates. Hospital cost was a weighted average of diagnosis-related group costs weighted by composite estimates of complication rates. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS:

Assuming equal survival, NACT produces a cost savings of $5616. If PDS improved median OS by 1.5 months or longer, PDS would be cost effective (CE) at a $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year threshold. If PDS improved OS by 3.2 months or longer, it would be CE at a $50,000 threshold. The model was robust to variation in costs and complication rates. Moderate decreases in the QOL with NACT would result in PDS being CE.

CONCLUSION:

A model based on the RCT comparing NACT and PDS showed NACT is a cost-saving treatment compared with PDS for AEOC in patients 65 years old or older. Small increases in OS with PDS or moderate declines in QOL with NACT would result in PDS being CE at the $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year threshold. Our results support further evaluation of the effects of PDS on OS, QOL and complications in AEOC patients 65 years old or older.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Ovarianas / Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares / Terapia Neoadjuvante / Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Ovarianas / Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares / Terapia Neoadjuvante / Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article