Cost-effectiveness of weekly adaptive radiotherapy versus standard IMRT in head and neck cancer alongside the ARTIX trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) comparing an adaptive radiotherapy (ART) strategy, based on weekly replanning, aiming to correct the parotid gland overdose during treatment and expecting therefore to decrease xerostomia, when compared to a standard IMRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted the ARTIX trial, a randomized, parallel-group, multicentric study comparing a systematic weekly replanning ART to a standard IMRT. The primary endpoint was the frequency of xerostomia at 12 months, measured by stimulating salivary flow with paraffin. The CEA was designed alongside the ARTIX trial which was linked to the French national health data system (SNDS). For each patient, healthcare consumptions and costs were provided by the SNDS. The reference case analysis was based on the primary endpoint of the trial. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 129 patients randomly assigned between 2013 and 2018, only 2 records were not linked to the SNDS, which provides a linkage proportion of 98.4%. All of the other 127 records were linked with good to very good robustness. On the intent-to-treat population at 12 months, mean total costs per patient were €41,564 (SD 23,624) and €33,063 (SD 16,886) for ART and standard IMRT arms, respectively (p = 0.033). Incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was €162,444 per xerostomia avoided. At 24 months, ICER was €194,521 per xerostomia avoided. For both progression-free and overall survival, ART was dominated by standard IMRT. CONCLUSION: The ART strategy was deemed to be not cost-effective compared with standard IMRT for patients with locally advanced oropharyngeal cancer.

Cost-effectiveness of using protons for breast irradiation aiming at minimizing cardiotoxicity: A risk-stratification analysis.

Background: Incidental exposure of the heart to ionizing irradiation is associated with an increased risk of ischemic heart disease and subsequent fatality in patients with breast cancer after radiotherapy. Proton beam therapy can limit the heart dose in breast irradiation to a negligible level. However, compared with conventional photon modality, proton breast irradiation is more expensive. In this study, we performed cost-effectiveness analyses to identify the type of patients who would be more suitable for protons. Methods: A Markov decision model was designed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of protons vs. photons in reducing the risk of irradiation-related ischemic heart disease. A baseline evaluation was performed on a 50-year-old woman patient without the preexisting cardiac risk factor. Furthermore, risk-stratification analyses for photon mean heart dose and preexisting cardiac risk were conducted on 40-, 50-, and 60-year-old women patients under different proton cost and willingness-to-pay (WTP) settings. Results: Using the baseline settings, the incremental effectiveness (protons vs. photons) increased from 0.043 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) to 0.964 QALY when preexisting cardiac risk increased to 10 times its baseline level. At a proton cost of 50,000 US dollars ($), protons could be cost-effective for ≤ 60-year-old patients with diabetes and ≤50-year-old patients with grade II-III hypertension at the WTP of China ($37,653/QALY); for ≤ 60-year-old patients with diabetes and ≤ 50-year-old patients with grade II-III hypertension or ≥ 2 major cardiac risk factors at a WTP of $50,000/QALY; and for ≤ 60-year-old patients with diabetes, grade II-III hypertension or ≥ 2 major cardiac risk factors and ≤ 50-year-old patients with total cholesterol ≥ 240 mg/dL at a WTP of $100,000/QALY. Conclusion: Patients' preexisting cardiac risk status was a key factor affecting the cardiac benefits gained from protons and should therefore be a major consideration for the clinical decision of using protons; cost-effective scenarios of protons exist in those patients with high risk of developing cardiac diseases.

Better preservation of erectile function in localized prostate cancer patients with modern proton therapy: Is it cost-effective?

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has gradually been recognized as favorable curative treatment for localized prostate cancer (PC). However, the high rate of erectile dysfunction (ED) after traditional photon-based SBRT remains an ongoing challenge that greatly impacts the quality of life of PC survivors. Modern proton therapy allows higher conformal SBRT delivery and has the potential to reduce ED occurrence but its cost-effectiveness remains uninvestigated. METHODS: A Markov decision model was designed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of proton SBRT versus photon SBRT in reducing irradiation-related ED. Base-case evaluation was performed on a 66-year-old (median age of PC) localized PC patient with normal pretreatment erectile function. Further, stratified analyses were performed for different age groups (50, 55, 60, 65, 70, and 75 years) and threshold analyses were conducted to estimate cost-effective scenarios. A Chinese societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (37,653 US dollars [$])/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) was adopted. RESULTS: For the base case, protons provided an additional 0.152 QALY at an additional cost of $7233.4, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $47,456.5/QALY. Protons was cost-effective for patients ≤62-year-old at the WTP of China (≤66-year-old at a WTP of $50,000/QALY; ≤73-year-old at a WTP of $100,000/QALY). For patients at median age, once the current proton cost ($18,000) was reduced to ≤$16,505.7 or the patient had a life expectancy ≥88 years, protons were cost-effective at the WTP of China. CONCLUSIONS: Upon assumption-based modeling, the results of current study support the use of proton SBRT in younger localized PC patients who are previously potent, for better preservation of erectile function. The findings await further validation using data from future comparative clinical trials.

Intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy as a radical treatment modality for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in China: Cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Compared to conventional intensity-modulated photon radiation therapy (IMRT), intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT) has potential to reduce irradiation-induced late toxicities while maintaining excellent tumor control in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). However, the relevant cost-effectiveness remains controversial. METHODS: A Markov decision tree analysis was performed under the assumption that IMPT offered normal tissue complication probability reduction (NTCP reduction) in long-term dysphagia, xerostomia, and hearing loss, compared to IMRT. Base-case evaluation was performed on T2N2M0 NPC of median age (43 years old). A Chinese societal willingness-to-pay threshold (33558 US dollars [$])/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) was adopted. RESULTS: For patients at median age and having NTCP reduction of 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, and 60%, their incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $102684.0/QALY, $43161.2/QALY, $24134.7/QALY, $13991.6/QALY, $8259.8/QALY, and $4436.1/QALY, respectively; IMPT should provide an NTCP reduction of ≥24% to be considered cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: IMPT has potential to be cost-effective for average Chinese NPC patients and should be validated clinically.

Optimizing oropharyngeal cancer management by using proton beam therapy: trends of cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a new-emerging cancer treatment in China but its treatment costs are high and not yet covered by Chinese public medical insurance. The advanced form of PBT, intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT), has been confirmed to reduce normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) as compared to conventional intensity-modulated photon-radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Herein, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness and applicability of IMPT versus IMRT for OPC patients in China, aiming at guiding the proper use of PBT. METHODS: A 7-state Markov model was designed for analysis. Base-case evaluation was performed on a 56-year-old (median age of OPC in China) patient under the assumption that IMPT could provide a 25% NTCP-reduction in long-term symptomatic dysphagia and xerostomia. Model robustness was examined using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, cohort analysis, and tornado diagram. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify the cost-effective scenarios. IMPT was considered as cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below the societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. RESULTS: Compared with IMRT, IMPT provided an extra 0.205 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) at an additional cost of 34,926.6 US dollars ($), and had an ICER of $170,082.4/ QALY for the base case. At the current WTP of China ($33,558 / QALY) and a current IMPT treatment costs of $50,000, IMPT should provide a minimum NTCP-reduction of 47.5, 50.8, 55.6, 63.3 and 77.2% to be considered cost-effective for patient age levels of 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50-year-old, respectively. For patients at the median age level, reducing the current IMPT costs ($50,000) to a $30,000 level would make the minimum NTCP-reduction threshold for "cost-effective" decrease from 91.4 to 44.6%, at the current WTP of China (from 69.0 to 33.5%, at a WTP of $50,000 / QALY; and from 39.7 to 19.1%, at a WTP of $100,000 / QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effective scenarios of PBT exist in Chinese OPC patients at the current WTP of China. Considering a potential upcoming increase in PBT use in China, such cost-effective scenarios may further expand if a decrease of proton treatment costs occurs or an increase of WTP level.

Clinical response assessment after contact X-Ray brachytherapy and chemoradiotherapy for organ preservation in rectal cancer T2-T3 M0: The time/dose factor influence.

INTRODUCTION: A neoadjuvant treatment aimed at rectal preservation should achieve a clinical complete response. This study comparing neoadjuvant treatment initiated with Contact X-ray (CXB) or External Beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is evaluating the influence of the time/dose parameter on clinical response during the first six months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective consecutive series included T2-3 rectal adenocarcinoma staged using digital examination (DRE), endoscopy, magnetic radiation imaging and/or endorectal ultrasound. All patients were treated with organ preservation intent. Treatment protocol combined CXB (80-110 Gy/3-4 fractions) and EBRT ± concurrent capecitabine. In tumor exceeding 3.5 cm treatment was often initiated using EBRT. Clinical response was assessed (DRE, proctoscopy ± imaging) at very close interval between 2 weeks and 6 months after treatment initiation. RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2017, 61 patients (T2: 31; T3: 30) M0 (median age: 76 years) were treated. Treatment was initiated in 40 patients (T2: 28, T3: 12) with contact X-ray and in 21 (T2: 4, T3: 17) with EBRT. Using contact X-ray or EBRT first treatment, clinical complete (or near complete) response at week 14(±1) was respectively 88% [95CI:74-96] and 33% [95CI:15-57]. In multivariate analysis the treatment chronology was the most significant factor influencing cCR (OR: 7.53). At 6 months, with contact X-ray first all patients were in clinical complete response and five with EBRT remained in partial response. With 61 months median follow-up time, the local recurrence rate was 10% [95% CI: 6-16] at 5 years. T3 and fungating tumors were at higher risk of local recurrence. Organ preservation with good function was achieved in 95% of cases. CONCLUSION: This non randomized study tends to show that in early T2-3 tumors, a strategy using upfront contact therapy, which is reducing the overall treatment time, is an option allowing a more favorable outcome than EBRT first.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of proton beam therapy for treatment decision making in paranasal sinus and nasal cavity cancers in China.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness is a pivotal consideration for clinical decision making of high-tech cancer treatment in developing countries. Intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT, the advanced form of proton beam therapy) has been found to improve the prognosis of the patients with paranasal sinus and nasal cavity cancers compared with intensity-modulated photon-radiation therapy (IMRT). However, the cost-effectiveness of IMPT has not yet been fully evaluated. This study aimed at evaluating the cost-effectiveness of IMPT versus IMRT for treatment decision making of paranasal sinus and nasal cavity cancers in Chinese settings. METHODS: A 3-state Markov model was designed for cost-effectiveness analysis. A base case evaluation was performed on a patient of 47-year-old (median age of patients with paranasal sinus and nasal cavity cancers in China). Model robustness was examined by probabilistic sensitivity analysis, Markov cohort analysis and Tornado diagram. Cost-effective scenarios of IMPT were further identified by one-way sensitivity analyses and stratified analyses were performed for different age levels. The outcome measure of the model was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A strategy was defined as cost-effective if the ICER was below the societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of China (30,828 US dollars ($) / quality-adjusted life year (QALY)). RESULTS: IMPT was identified as being cost-effective for the base case at the WTP of China, providing an extra 1.65 QALYs at an additional cost of $38,928.7 compared with IMRT, and had an ICER of $23,611.2 / QALY. Of note, cost-effective scenarios of IMPT only existed in the following independent conditions: probability of IMPT eradicating cancer ≥0.867; probability of IMRT eradicating cancer ≤0.764; or cost of IMPT ≤ $52,163.9. Stratified analyses for different age levels demonstrated that IMPT was more cost-effective in younger patients than older patients, and was cost-effective only in patients ≤56-year-old. CONCLUSIONS: Despite initially regarded as bearing high treatment cost, IMPT could still be cost-effective for patients with paranasal sinus and nasal cavity cancers in China. The tumor control superiority of IMPT over IMRT and the patient's age should be the principal considerations for clinical decision of prescribing this new irradiation technique.

Long-term quality of life and its predictive factors after oncologic surgery and microvascular reconstruction in patients with oral or oropharyngeal cancer.

The aims of this study were to evaluate long-term quality of life (QoL) and to determine its predictive factors after oncologic surgery and free flap reconstruction in patients with oral or oropharyngeal cancer. Patients treated at our institution between 2000 and 2009, who are alive and disease-free at least 1 year after therapy, completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 questionnaire and the specific H&N35 module. Eighty patients were included in our study. Global QoL score was 69.3 ± 22.7%. Global QoL and general symptoms were correlated with T stage, whereas head and neck symptoms were correlated with T stage and tumor involvement of the tongue base. Emotional and social functioning scales, and resumption of professional activity were significantly associated with global QoL. In conclusion, T stage, tumor involvement of the tongue base, professional status and emotional and social functions were the main determinants of QoL in our study.