Cost-effectiveness analysis of MRI, CE-CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting colorectal liver metastases eligible for hepatic resection.

Objectives: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a serious challenge for the health system. In 2022 CRC represented 8% of cancer diagnoses in the United States. 30% of patients already show metastases at the initial tumor staging. The majority of these metastases are sited in the liver. According to their extension and the status of the tumor colorectal liver metastases can be treated in several ways, with hepatic resection being the gold-standard. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT), positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be used for evaluation of resectability of these liver metastases. The aim of this study is to assess the most economic imaging modality for detecting liver metastases eligible for hepatic resection by analyzing their cost-effectiveness. Materials and methods: In our study, a Markov state transition model was built to calculate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and overall costs for each diagnostic strategy in accord with the stated input values obtained from scientific research. Further, probabilistic sensitivity analyses by means of Monte Carlo simulations were performed to consider possible model uncertainties. For evaluation of the cost-effectiveness on an economic threshold, the Willingness-to-pay (WTP) was set at $ 100,000. The applied values and the calculated results are based on the U.S. healthcare system. Results: CE-CT led to overall costs of $ 42,874.02 and 8.47 QALYs, whereas MRI led to $ 40,863.65 and 8.50 QALYs. PET/CT resulted in overall costs of $ 43,216.74 and 8.48 QALYs. Therefore, MRI was determined to be the dominant strategy in the model. According to the performed sensitivity analyses, MRI remained cost-effective over a wide range of WTPs. Conclusion: In conclusion, according to our analysis, MRI is the dominant strategy for detecting hepatic metastases eligible for hepatic resection in colorectal cancer.

Economic evaluation of 18F-FDG PET/CT, MRI and CE-CT in selection of colorectal liver metastases eligible for ablation - A cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancers (CRC) are among the world's most prevailing cancer entities. In a third of all cases, the patients have already developed distant metastases - mainly in the liver - at the time of detection. Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) can be treated by surgical resection or, as is possible in most cases, by percutaneous ablation. For selecting the liver metastases eligible for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or microwave ablation (MWA), the common imaging modalities are magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT). This study aims to evaluate those imaging modalities for selecting liver lesions eligible for ablation according to their long-term cost-effectiveness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model was applied, calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and accumulative costs for every diagnostic strategy, according to predefined input parameters obtained from published research. Further, sensitivity analyses were executed to prove the certainty of the calculations by running Monte-Carlo simulations with 30,000 reiterations. The Willingness-to-pay (WTP) is at $ 100,000. All calculations are based on the U.S. healthcare system. RESULTS: CE-CT caused cumulative costs of $ 31,940.98 and 8,99 QALYs, whereas MRI caused $ 32,070.83 and 9,01 QALYs. PET/CT caused cumulative costs of $ 33,013.21 and 8,99 QALYs. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, according to our analysis, MRI is the most cost-effective strategy for detecting liver metastases eligible for ablation and therefore should be seen as the gold standard.

Treatment Assessment of pNET and NELM after Everolimus by Quantitative MRI Parameters.

Assessment of treatment response to targeted therapies such as everolimus is difficult, especially in slow-growing tumors such as NETs. In this retrospective study, 17 patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) and hepatic metastases (NELMs) (42 target lesions) who received everolimus were analyzed. Intralesional signal intensities (SI) of non-contrast T1w, T2w and DCE imaging, and apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCmean and ADCmin) of DWI, were measured on baseline and first follow-up MRI after everolimus initiation. Response assessment was categorized according to progression-free survival (PFS), with responders (R) showing a PFS of ≥11 months. ADCmin of NELMs decreased in Rs whereas it increased in non-responders (NR). Percentual changes of ADCmin and ADCmean differed significantly between response groups (p < 0.03). By contrast, ADC of the pNETs tended to increase in Rs, while there was no change in NRs. Tumor-to-liver (T/L) ratio of T1 SI of NELMs increased in Rs and decreased in NRs, and percentual changes differed significantly between response groups (p < 0.02). T1 SI of the pNETs tended to decrease in Rs and increase in Ns. The quotient of pretherapeutic and posttherapeutic ADCmin values (DADCmin) and length of everolimus treatment showed significant association with PFS in univariable Cox analysis. In conclusion, quantitative MRI, especially DWI, seems to allow treatment assessment of pNETs with NELMs under everolimus. Interestingly, the responding NELMs showed decreasing ADC values, and there might be an opposite effect on ADC and T1 SI between NELMs and pNETs.

Diagnostic Workup for Patients with Solid Renal Masses: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: For patients with solid renal masses, a precise differentiation between malignant and benign tumors is crucial for forward treatment management. Even though MRI and CT are often deemed as the gold standard in the diagnosis of solid renal masses, CEUS may also offer very high sensitivity in detection. The aim of this study therefore was to evaluate the effectiveness of CEUS from an economical point of view. METHODS: A decision-making model based on a Markov model assessed expenses and utilities (in QALYs) associated with CEUS, MRI and CT. The utilized parameters were acquired from published research. Further, a Monte Carlo simulation-based deterministic sensitivity analysis of utilized variables with 30,000 repetitions was executed. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) is at USD 100,000/QALY. RESULTS: In the baseline, CT caused overall expenses of USD 10,285.58 and an efficacy of 11.95 QALYs, whereas MRI caused overall expenses of USD 7407.70 and an efficacy of 12.25. Further, CEUS caused overall expenses of USD 5539.78, with an efficacy of 12.44. Consequently, CT and MRI were dominated by CEUS, and CEUS remained cost-effective in the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: CEUS should be considered as a cost-effective imaging strategy for the initial diagnostic workup and assessment of solid renal masses compared to CT and MRI.