Cost-Effectiveness analysis of combining plasma Epstein-Barr virus DNA testing and different surveillance imaging modalities for nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients in first remission.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of stage-based post-radiotherapy (PRT) nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) surveillance strategies. METHODS: Four post-radiotherapy surveillance strategies were established by a Markov model based on data from 1664 patients: 1) clinical follow-up (CFP) with biannual Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA (EBV DNA strategy); 2) CFP with biannual EBV DNA, annual head and neck magnetic resonance imaging (HNMRI), chest X-ray, abdominal ultrasonography, bone scan (only for the first two years) for five years (MCWU strategy); 3) CFP with biannual EBV DNA, annual HNMRI, chest, abdomen, pelvic computerized tomography (CT) and bone scan for the first two years, followed by annual MCWU strategy (without bone scans) for the last three years (CT strategy); 4) CFP with biannual EBV DNA, annual whole-body positron emission/computerized tomography (PET/CT) for the first two years and biannual EBV DNA for the last three years (PET/CT strategy). RESULTS: Compared with the EBV DNA strategy, the MCWU, CT, and PET/CT strategies gained 0.017, 0.047, and 0.082 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) for stage I-II patients. For stage III and IVa patients, the PET/CT strategy had a favorable incremental effectiveness (ICERs) of 0.277 and 0.385 QALY, respectively. The ICERs for the MCWU, CT, and PET/CT strategies were $74,037, $34,882, and $34,696 for stage III and $62,364, $27,981, and $28,340 for stage IVa, respectively. CONCLUSION: EBV DNA strategy was cost-effective for the long-term surveillance of stage I-II NPC patients with CR. PET/CT strategy was recommeded for patients having IVa NPC. As for stage III NPC, PET/CT strategy was still acceptable with the development of economy in China.

Patterns of relapse in patients with localized gastric adenocarcinoma who had surgery with or without adjunctive therapy: costs and effectiveness of surveillance.

PURPOSE: After therapy of localized gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) patients, the costs of surveillance, relapse patterns, and possibility of salvage are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 246 patients, who after having a negative peritoneal staging, received therapy (any therapy which included surgery) and were surveyed (every 3-6 months in the first 3 years, then yearly; ∼10 CTs and ∼7 endoscopies per patient). We used the 2016 Medicare dollars reimbursed as the "costs" for surveillance. RESULTS: Common features were: Caucasians (57%), men (60%), poorly differentiated histology (76%), preoperative chemotherapy (74%), preoperative chemoradiation (59%), and had surgery (100%). At a median follow-up of 3.7 years (range, 0.1 to 18.3), the median overall survival (OS) was 9.2 years (95% CI, 6.0 to 11.2). Tumor grade (p = 0.02), p/yp stage (p < 0.001), % residual GAC (p = 0.05), the R status (p = 0.01), total gastrectomy (p = 0.001), and relapse type (p = 0.02) were associated with OS. Relapse occurred in 79 (32%) patients (only 8% were local-regional) and 90% occurred within 36 months of surgery. P/yp stage (p < 0.001) and total gastrectomy (p = 0.01) were independent prognosticators for OS in the multivariate analysis. Only 1 relapsed patient had successful salvage therapy. The estimated reimbursement for imaging studies and endoscopies was $1,761,221.91 (marked underestimation of actual costs). CONCLUSIONS: The median OS of localized GAC patients was excellent with infrequent local-regional relapses. Rigorous surveillance had a low yield and high "costs". Our data suggest that less frequent surveillance intervals and limiting expensive investigations to symptomatic patients may be warranted.