Rising Economic Burden of Renal Cell Carcinoma among Elderly Patients in the USA: Part II-An Updated Analysis of SEER-Medicare Data.

BACKGROUND: The influx of new oncologic technologies has changed the treatment landscape of renal cell carcincoma (RCC) in the last decade. This study updated a previously published paper on the economic burden of RCC in the USA by using more recent data to examine the impact of various forms of new oncologic technologies on the economic burden of RCC. METHODS: Using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, we employed prevalence and incidence costing approaches to estimate RCC costs from the payer's perspective. We conducted a longitudinal analysis of cost data per patient per month for a prevalence cohort of patients with RCC to determine which category of new technology (surgery, radiation, or cancer drugs) was the major cost driver for RCC. We then applied the incidence costing approach to estimate costs related to RCC by care phase (initial, continuing, and terminal) and compared costs between two incidence cohorts to examine how new technology affected the economic burden of RCC over time. RESULTS: After controlling for demographic factors, clinical characteristics, neighborhood socioeconomic status, and time trend, we found that rising per patient per month costs were driven by new technologies in cancer drugs. Incidence-based analysis showed the annual net cost (2018 US$) for patients with distant-stage RCC diagnosed between 2002 and 2006 was $51,639, $19,025, $76,603, and $29,045 for the initial, continuing (year 1), terminal (died from RCC), and terminal (died from other causes) care phases, respectively. Costs increased to $70,703, $34,716, $107,989, and $47,538, respectively, for the incidence cohort diagnosed between 2007 and 2011. CONCLUSION: The rising economic burden of RCC was most pronounced among patients with distant-stage RCC, and driven primarily by new cancer drugs.

Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Updated Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines for Average-Risk Women.

BACKGROUND: Several specialty societies have recently updated their breast cancer screening guidelines in late 2015/early 2016. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of US-based mammography screening guidelines. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model to generate the natural history of invasive breast cancer and capture how screening and treatment modified the natural course of the disease. We used the model to assess the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies, including annual screening starting at the age of 40 years, biennial screening starting at the age of 50 years, and a hybrid strategy that begins screening at the age of 45 years and transitions to biennial screening at the age of 55 years, combined with three cessation ages: 75 years, 80 years, and no upper age limit. Findings were summarized as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) and cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier. RESULTS: The screening strategy that starts annual mammography at the age of 45 years and switches to biennial screening between the ages of 55 and 75 years was the most cost-effective, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $40,135/QALY. Probabilistic analysis showed that the hybrid strategy had the highest probability of being optimal when the societal willingness to pay was between $44,000/QALY and $103,500/QALY. Within the range of commonly accepted societal willingness to pay, no optimal strategy involved screening with a cessation age of 80 years or older. CONCLUSIONS: The screening strategy built on a hybrid design is the most cost-effective for average-risk women. By considering the balance between benefits and harms in forming its recommendations, this hybrid screening strategy has the potential to optimize the health care system's investment in the early detection and treatment of breast cancer.

Variation in Physician-Specific Episode Payments for Major Cancer Surgery and Implications for the Merit-Based Incentive Program.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 1.5 million clinicians in the United States will be affected by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) new payment program, the Merit-based Incentive Program (MIPS), where clinicians will be penalized or rewarded based on the health care expenditures of their patients. We therefore examined expenditures for major cancer surgery to understand physician-specific variation in episode payments. METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data to identify patients aged 66-99 y who underwent a prostatectomy, nephrectomy, lung, or colorectal resection for cancer from 2008 to 2012. We calculated 90-d episode payments, attributed each episode to a physician, and evaluated physician-level payment variation. Next, we determined which component (index admission, readmission, physician services, postacute care, hospice) drove differences in payments. Finally, we evaluated payments by geographic region, number of comorbidities, and cancer stage. RESULTS: We identified 39,109 patients who underwent surgery by 1 of 7182 providers. There was wide variation in payments for each procedure (prostatectomy: $7046-$40,687; nephrectomy: $8855-$82,489; lung resection: $11,167-$223,467; colorectal resection: $9711-$199,480). The largest component difference in episode payments varied by condition: physician payments for prostatectomy (29%), postacute care for nephrectomy (38%) and colorectal resections (38%), and index hospital admission for lung resections (43%) but were fairly stable across region, comorbidity number, and cancer stage. CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing major cancer surgery, 90-d episode payments vary widely across surgeons. The components driving such variation differ by condition but remain stable across region, number of comorbidities, and cancer stage. These data suggest that programs to reduce specific component payments may have advantages over those targeting individual physicians for decreasing health care expenditures.

Greater Spending Associated with Improved Survival for Some Cancers in OCM-Defined Episodes.

BACKGROUND: Previous research finds significant variation in spending and utilization across regions, with little evidence of differences in outcomes. While such findings have been interpreted as evidence that spending can be reduced without compromising patient outcomes, the link between spending variation and outcomes remains a critical question. OBJECTIVE: To use evidence from geographic variations in spending and an individual-level survival analysis to test whether spending within oncology care episodes is associated with survival, where episodes are defined as in the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation's Oncology Care Model (OCM). METHODS: In this retrospective cohort analysis, patient data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Medicare (SEER-Medicare) database for 2007-2013 were linked to hospital referral regions (HRRs) using ZIP codes. Patients in the SEER program are a part of selected population-based cancer registries throughout the United States whose records are linked to Medicare enrollment and claims data (93% of elderly registry patients were successfully linked to Medicare data). Episodes of cancer care were defined as in the OCM: 6 months following a triggering chemotherapy claim. We analyzed episodes of care for 5 tumor types: advanced breast cancer (BC), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), multiple myeloma (MM), and chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). We removed the effects of differentials in Medicare payment rates, which were mostly geographic. Regression analysis was then used to calculate standardized spending levels for each HRR, that is, spending adjusted for differences in patient and episode characteristics. To examine the effect of spending during OCM-defined episodes on individual-level survival, we used Cox regression with patient characteristics and standardized HRR spending per episode as covariates. To address concerns that may arise from multiple comparisons across the 5 tumor types, we used the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure to control the false discovery rate. RESULTS: Our analysis showed significant differences in standardized spending across HRRs. Compared with spending at the 20th percentile episode, spending at the 80th percentile ranged from 25% higher ($57,392 vs. $45,995 for MM) to 47% higher ($36,920 vs. $24,127 for RCC), indicating practice style variation across regions. The hazard of dying for patients with NSCLC and MM statistically significantly decreased by 7% (HR = 0.93, P = 0.006) and 13% (HR = 0.87, P = 0.019), respectively, for a $10,000 increase in standardized spending (in 2013 U.S. dollars). For the 3 other cancers, spending effects were not statistically significant. After using the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure with a 5% false discovery rate, the effects of increased spending on improved survival for NSCLC and MM remained statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The association we found between spending and survival suggests caution may be warranted for physicians, pharmacists, other health care professionals, and policymakers involved in efforts to reduce across-the-board spending within OCM-defined episodes for at least 2 of the 5 cancers studied. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this research was provided by Novartis Pharmaceuticals to Precision Health Economics in support of research design, analysis, and technical writing services. The funder provided input on study design and comments on the draft report. Baumgardner, Shahabi, and Linthicum are employees of Precision Health Economics (PHE), a health care consultancy to the insurance and life science industries, including firms that market oncology therapies. Vine was an employee of PHE at the time of this research. Zacker is an employee of and shareholder in Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Lakdawalla is a consultant to PHE and holds equity in its parent company, Precision Medicine Group.

Disparities in Colon Cancer Survival by Insurance Type: A Population-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colon cancer is a common cancer with a relatively high survival for nonmetastatic disease if appropriate treatment is given. A lower survival rate for patients with no or inadequate insurance has previously been documented, but the differences have not been explored in detail on a population level. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine survival for patients with colon cancer by insurance type. DESIGN: Complete analysis was used to examine 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates. SETTINGS: This was a population-level analysis. PATIENTS: Patients were drawn from the in-patients diagnosed with colon cancer at ages 15 to 64 years between 2007 and 2012 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 database by insurance type (Medicaid, uninsured, or other insurance) MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:: This study measured overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 57,790 cases were included, with insurance information available for 55,432. Of those, 7611 (13.7%), 4131 (7.5%), and 43,690 (78.8%) had Medicaid, no insurance, or other insurance. Patients with Medicaid or without insurance were more likely to have metastatic disease compared with those with other insurance. Survival was higher for patients with insurance other than Medicaid, with 3-year survival estimates of 57.0%, 61.2%, and 75.6% for Medicaid, uninsured, and other insurance. Significant disparities continued to be observed after adjustment for stage, especially for later-stage disease. When only patients with stage I to II disease who had definitive surgery and resection of ≥12 lymph nodes were included in the analysis, the discrepancy was decreased, especially for uninsured patients. LIMITATIONS: Information on chemotherapy use and biological markers of disease severity are not available in the database. CONCLUSIONS: Colon cancer survival is lower for patients with no insurance or with Medicaid than for those with private insurance. Differences in rates of definitive surgery and adequate lymph node dissection explain some of this disparity. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A585.

Socioeconomic status and breast cancer treatment.

PURPOSE: Evidence suggests substantial disparities in breast cancer survival by socioeconomic status (SES). We examine the extent to which receipt of newer, less invasive, or more effective treatments-a plausible source of disparities in survival-varies by SES among elderly women with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: Multivariate regression analyses applied to 11,368 women (age 66-90 years) identified from SEER-Medicare as having invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 2006-2009. Socioeconomic status was defined based on Medicaid enrollment and level of poverty of the census tract of residence. All analyses controlled for demographic, clinical health status, spatial, and healthcare system characteristics. RESULTS: Poor and near-poor women were less likely than high SES women to receive sentinel lymph node biopsy and radiation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Poor women were also less likely than near-poor or high SES women to receive any axillary surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in use of aromatase inhibitors (AI) between poor and high SES women. However, near-poor women who initiated hormonal therapy were more likely to rely exclusively on tamoxifen, and less likely to use the more expensive but more effective AI when compared to both poor and high SES women. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that SES disparities in the receipt of treatments for incident breast cancer are both pervasive and substantial. These disparities remained despite women's geographic area of residence and extent of disease, suggesting important gaps in access to effective breast cancer care.

Downstream Breast Imaging Following Screening Mammography in Medicare Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Screening tests are generally not recommended in patients with advanced cancer and limited life expectancy. Nonetheless, screening mammography still occurs and may lead to follow-up testing. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency of downstream breast imaging following screening mammography in patients with advanced colorectal or lung cancer. DESIGN: Population-based study. PARTICIPANTS: The study included continuously enrolled female fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years of age with advanced colorectal (stage IV) or lung (stage IIIB-IV) cancer reported to a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry between 2000 and 2011. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed the utilization of diagnostic mammography, breast ultrasound, and breast MRI following screening mammography. Logistic regression models were used to explore independent predictors of utilization of downstream tests while controlling for cancer type and patient sociodemographic and regional characteristics. KEY RESULTS: Among 34,127 women with advanced cancer (23% colorectal; 77% lung cancer; mean age at diagnosis 75 years), 9% (n = 3159) underwent a total of 5750 screening mammograms. Of these, 11% (n = 639) resulted in at least one subsequent diagnostic breast imaging examination within 9 months. Diagnostic mammography was most common (9%; n = 532), followed by ultrasound (6%; n = 334) and MRI (0.2%; n = 14). Diagnostic mammography rates were higher in whites than African Americans (OR, 1.6; p <0.05). Higher ultrasound utilization was associated with more favorable economic status (OR, 1.8; p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with advanced colorectal and lung cancer, 9% continued screening mammography, and 11% of these screening studies led to at least one additional downstream test, resulting in costs with little likelihood of meaningful benefit.

Predictors of Unplanned Hospitalizations in Patients With Nonmetastatic Lung Cancer During Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To determine predictors of unplanned hospitalizations in patients with lung cancer to receive chemotherapy in the outpatient setting and examine the potential financial burden of these events.
. DESIGN: Retrospective, longitudinal cohort study.
. SETTING: The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database.
. SAMPLE: Of 104,388 incident cases of lung cancer diagnosed from 2005-2009, 2,457 cases of patients with lung cancer who received outpatient chemotherapy were identified. Patients were aged 66 years or older at diagnosis, had uninterrupted Medicare Part A and B coverage with no health maintenance organization enrollment, and received IV chemotherapy at least once.
. METHODS: Generalized estimating equations was used.
. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Patient age, sex, race, marital status, degree of residential urbanization, median income, education level, stage, receipt of radiation therapy, and comorbidities.
. FINDINGS: Younger age, non-White race, lower education, higher income, receipt of radiation therapy, and lack of preexisting comorbidity were significant predictors of the likelihood of an initial unplanned hospitalization for lung cancer. Non-White race, receipt of radiation therapy, and comorbidity were factors associated with an increased number of hospitalizations. 
. CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned hospitalizations are frequent, disruptive, and costly. This article defines areas for further exploration to identify patients at high risk for unexpected complications. 
. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: This article represents a foundation for development of risk models to enable nursing evaluation of patient risk for chemotherapy treatment interruption and unplanned hospitalization.

Health disparities and impact on outcomes in children with primary central nervous system solid tumors.

OBJECTIVE Health disparities in access to care, early detection, and survival exist among adult patients with cancer. However, there have been few reports assessing how health disparities impact pediatric patients with malignancies. The objective in this study was to examine the impact of racial/ethnic and social factors on disease presentation and outcome for children with primary CNS solid tumors. METHODS The authors examined all children (age ≤ 18 years) in whom CNS solid tumors were diagnosed and who were enrolled in the Texas Cancer Registry between 1995 and 2009 (n = 2421). Geocoded information was used to calculate the driving distance between a patient's home and the nearest pediatric cancer treatment center. Socioeconomic status (SES) was determined using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality formula and 2007-2011 US Census block group data. Logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with advanced-stage disease. Survival probability and hazard ratios were calculated using life table methods and Cox regression. RESULTS Children with advanced-stage CNS solid tumors were more likely to be < 1 year old, Hispanic, and in the lowest SES quartile (all p < 0.05). The adjusted odds ratios of presenting with advanced-stage disease were higher in children < 1 year old compared with children > 10 years old (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.06-2.75), and in Hispanic patients compared with non-Hispanic white patients (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.19-2.04). Distance to treatment and SES did not impact disease stage at presentation in the adjusted analysis. Furthermore, 1- and 5-year survival probability were worst in children 1-10 years old, Hispanic patients, non-Hispanic black patients, and those in the lowest SES quartile (p < 0.05). In the adjusted survival model, only advanced disease and malignant behavior were predictive of mortality. CONCLUSIONS Racial/ethnic disparities are associated with advanced-stage disease presentation for children with CNS solid tumors. Disease stage at presentation and tumor behavior are the most important predictors of survival.

Economic Costs Avoided by Diagnosing Melanoma Six Months Earlier Justify >100 Benign Biopsies.

New melanoma drugs bring enormous benefits but do so at significant costs. Because melanoma grows deeper and deadlier over time, deeper lesions are costlier due to increased sentinel lymph node biopsy, chemotherapy, and disease-associated income loss. Prior studies have justified pigmented lesion biopsies on a "value per life" basis; by contrast we sought to assess how many biopsies are justified per melanoma found on a purely economic basis. We modeled how melanomas in the United States would behave if diagnosis were delayed by 6 months, eg, not biopsied, only observed until the next surveillance visit. Economic loss from delayed biopsy is the obverse of economic benefit of performing biopsy earlier. Growth rates were based on Liu et al. The results of this study can be applied to all patients presenting to dermatologists with pigmented skin lesions suspicious for melanoma. In-situ melanomas were excluded because no studies to date have modeled growth rates analogous to those for invasive melanoma. We assume conservatively that all melanomas not biopsied initially will be biopsied and treated 6 months later. Major modeled costs are (1) increased sentinel lymph node biopsy, (2) increased chemotherapy for metastatic lesions using increased 5-yr death as metastasis marker, and (3) income loss per melanoma death at $413,370 as previously published. Costs avoided by diagnosing melanoma earlier justify 170 biopsies per melanoma found. Efforts to penalize "unnecessary" biopsies may be economically counterproductive.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(5):527-532.

Sequential Therapies and the Cost-Effectiveness of Treating Metastatic Colon Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Technological advances in colon cancer treatment have significantly increased survival outcomes among metastatic patients. With different chemotherapy and biologic regimens administered in first, second, and subsequent lines of treatments, costs and survival outcomes vary considerably. However, there is little evidence on how the type of regime administered in the first line of treatment affects the costs and survival outcomes of the second line of treatment. OBJECTIVE: To examine how the cost-effectiveness of second-line treatment for elderly metastatic colon cancer patients varies by the type of regimen administered in the first line of treatment. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry was used, which is linked with the Medicare claims database, to study elderly metastatic patients diagnosed between 2003 and 2009. Average survivals are estimated using the robust nonparametric Kaplan-Meier method. Selection bias was adjusted for using inverse probability weighting and censoring using robust nonparametric methods of estimating the average of total health care costs. RESULTS: Mean incremental survival was 6.7 months for patients who received second-line treatment (95% CI = 5.7-7.7) compared with those receiving only first-line treatment. However, the mean incremental survival varied between 4 months (95% CI = 0.0-7.3) and 9 months (95% CI = 6.5-11.0) depending on whether fluorouracil with or without leucovorin, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, or other agents were administered in first-line treatment. The mean incremental cost associated with receipt of second-line treatment was $60,231 (95% CI = 52,461-64,198) but ranged between $55,368 (95% CI = 48,294-61,290) and $71,211 (95% CI = 43,168-99,667), depending on the type of regimen administered in the first-line treatment. Combining survival benefits and costs, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per life-year gained associated with the receipt of second-line treatment were $97,368 (95% CI = 80,415-117,965); $110,621 (95% CI = 89,560-133,961); $130,689 (95% CI = 101,459-171,918); and $247,951 (95% CI = 112,629808,976) when irinotican, fluorouracil/leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and "other" combinations were, respectively, administered in first-line treatment. In addition, the results varied depending on which statistical method was used. CONCLUSIONS: When therapies are administered in a sequential manner, the cost-effectiveness of the second line of therapy depends on what was administered in the first line of therapy. DISCLOSURES: Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals provided funding for this project. Onukwugha has received research funding from Bayer and Amgen and has a consultant/advisory relationship with Jansen Analytics at Johnson & Johnson. Seal was formerly an employee of Bayer and holds stock in Bayer. Mullins has research funding sponsored by Bayer and Pfizer and has a consultant/advisory relationship with Bayer, Amgen, BMS, Genentech, GSK, Novartis, NovoNordisk, and Pfizer. Woldemichael and Nader report no conflicts of interest. All authors contributed to the concept and design of this study. Onukwugha, Seal, and Mullins collected the data, with assistance from Woldemichael and Hanna, while Woldemichael interpreted the data, assisted by the other authors. The manuscript was written primarily by Woldemichael, with assistance from the other authors, and revised by Seal, Hanna, and Mullins, with assistance from Woldemichael and Onukwugha.

An international comparison of costs of end-of-life care for advanced lung cancer patients using health administrative data.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of end-of-life cancer care differ in Canada and the United States; yet little is known about differences in service-specific and overall costs. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare end-of-life costs in Ontario, Canada, and the United States, using administrative health data. DESIGN: Advanced-stage nonsmall cell lung cancer patients who died from cancer at age ⩾ 65.5 years in 2001-2005 were selected from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database (N = 16,858) and the Ontario Cancer Registry (N = 8643). We estimated total and service-specific costs (2009 US dollars) in each of the last 6 months of life from the public payer perspectives for short-term and long-term survivors (lived < 180 and ⩾ 180 days post-diagnosis, respectively). Services were defined for comparisons between systems. RESULTS: Mean monthly costs increased as death approached, were higher in short-term than long-term survivors, and were generally higher in the United States than in Ontario until the month before death, when they were similar (long-term survivors: US$10,464 and US$10,094 (p = 0.53), short-term survivors US$14,455 and US$12,836 (p = 0.11), in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare and Ontario, respectively). Costs for Medicare hospice and Ontario's palliative care components were similar and increased closer to death. Inpatient hospitalization was the main cost driver with similar costs in both cohorts, despite lower utilization in the United States. The compositions of many services and costs differed. CONCLUSION: Costs for nonsmall cell lung cancer patients were slightly higher in the United States than Ontario until 1 month before death. Administrative data allow exploration and international comparisons of reimbursement policies, health-care delivery, and costs at the end of life.

Cost-Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy versus Primary Surgery in Elderly Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer has increased in recent years. There is uncertainty about NAC's effectiveness and no study of its cost-effectiveness compared with that of standard primary debulking surgery (PDS). OBJECTIVES: To seek answers to three important questions: 1) What is the lifetime cost of treating elderly patients with advanced ovarian cancer, based on the primary treatment received? 2) Are the extra costs expended by the NAC group worth any extra survival advantage? 3) Would NAC potentially benefit a particular subgroup and serve as a cost-effective first-line treatment approach? METHODS: A cohort of elderly women (≥65 years) with stage III/IV ovarian cancer was identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare linked database from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2009. Cost analysis was conducted from a payer perspective, and direct medical costs incurred by Medicare were integrated for each patient. Cumulative treatment costs were estimated with a phase-of-care approach, and effectiveness was measured as years of survival. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and propensity-score-adjusted net monetary benefit regression was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of NAC per life-year gained. Analyses were further stratified by risk group categorization on the basis of tumor stage, patient age, and comorbidity score. RESULTS: Average lifetime cost for treatment with NAC was $17,417 more than with PDS. With only 0.1 incremental life-year gained, the ICER estimate was $174,173. Stratification, however, helped to delineate the treatment effect. Patients in the high-risk subgroup incurred $34,390 and 0.8 life-years more than did patients in the PDS subgroup, with a corresponding ICER of $42,987. In the non-high-risk subgroup, NAC use was dominated by PDS (more costly, less effective). CONCLUSIONS: Administering NAC before surgery to patients in the high-risk subgroup was cost-effective at "normal" levels of willingness to pay, but not for the overall sample or for patients in the non-high-risk subgroup.

Cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surveillance of non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic surveillance for non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE) is contentious and its cost effectiveness unclear. OBJECTIVE: To perform an economic analysis of endoscopic surveillance strategies. DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis by using a simulation Markov model to synthesize evidence from large epidemiologic studies and clinical data for surveillance, based on international guidelines, applied in a coordinator-managed surveillance program. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital, South Australia. PATIENTS: A total of 2040 patient-years of follow-up. INTERVENTION: (1) No surveillance, (2) 2-yearly endoscopic surveillance of patients with non-dysplastic BE and 6-monthly surveillance of patients with low-grade dysplasia, (3) a hypothetical strategy of biomarker-modified surveillance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: U.S. cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ratios. RESULTS: Compared with no surveillance, surveillance produced an estimated incremental cost per QALY ratio of $60,858. This was reduced to $38,307 when surveillance practice was modified by a hypothetical biomarker-based strategy. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the likelihood that surveillance alone was cost-effective compared with no surveillance was 16.0% and 60.6% if a hypothetical biomarker-based strategy was added to surveillance, at an acceptability threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained. LIMITATIONS: Treatment options for BE that overlap those for symptomatic GERD were omitted. CONCLUSION: By using best available estimates of the malignant potential of BE, endoscopic surveillance of patients with non-dysplastic BE is unlikely to be cost-effective for the majority of patients and depends heavily on progression rates between dysplasia grades. However, strategies that modify surveillance according to cancer risk might be cost-effective, provided that high-risk individuals can be identified and prioritized for surveillance.

Long-term medical-care costs related to prostate cancer: estimates from linked SEER-Medicare data.

Limited data are available concerning long-term prostate cancer (PCa)-related medical costs for use in assessing PCa prevention strategies. The aim of this study was to examine treatment, long-term survival, and long-term PCa-related costs by cancer stage. Costs in phases of care based on the natural history of PCa were also examined. Our data illustrate that initial care is characteristic of a rapid rate of cost accrual. This rate then decreases during continuing care. For terminal care, only stage IV resumes a rate of cost accrual similar to initial care. With average PCa-related costs of $18,168 observed over an average follow-up of 4 years, prevention strategies may result in a reduction in medical costs.