Cancer costs and outcomes for common cancer sites in the Finnish population between 2009-2014.

BACKGROUND: The cost of cancer and outcomes of cancer care have been discussed a lot since cancer represents 3-6% of total healthcare costs and cost estimations have indicated growing costs. There are studies considering the cost of all cancers, but studies focusing on the cost of disease and outcomes in most common cancer sites are limited. The objective of this study was to analyze the development of the costs and outcomes in Finland between 2009 and 2014 per cancer site. METHODS: The National cost, episode and outcomes data were obtained from the National register databases based on International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 diagnosis codes. Cost data included both the direct and indirect costs. Two hospitals were used to validate the costs of care. The outcome measures included relative survival rate, mortality, sick leave days per patient and number of new disability pensions. FINDINGS: The outcomes of cancer care in most common cancer sites have improved in Finland between 2009-2014. The real costs per new cancer patient decreased in seven out of ten most common cancer sites. The significance of different cost components differ significantly between the different cancer sites. The share of medication costs of the total cost of all cancers increased, but decreased for the five most common cancer sites. INTERPRETATION: The changes in the cost components indicate that the length of stay has shortened in special care and treatment methods have developed towards outpatient care. This partially explains the decrease of costs. Also, at the same time outcomes improved, which indicates that decrease in costs did not come at the expense of treatment quality. As the survival rates increase, the relevance of mortality measures decreases and the relevance of other, patient-relevant outcome measures increases. In the future, the outcomes and costs of health care systems should be assessed routinely for the most common patient groups.

Cancer costs and outcomes in the Finnish population 2004-2014.

INTRODUCTION: The cost of cancer and outcomes of cancer care has been much debated, since cancer represents 3-6% of total healthcare costs. The objective of this study was to analyse the development of the costs and outcomes in Finland between 2004 and 2014. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The national cost, episodes and outcomes data were obtained from the national register databases. Two hospitals were used to validate the costs of care. The outcome measures included relative survival rate, mortality, sick leave days per patient and number of new disability pensions. RESULTS: The total cost of cancer in 2014 was 927 million €. The real costs increased by 1.7% per year over the period studied, while the cost per new cancer patient decreased. The relative survival rate was enhanced by 7%, and the number of sick leave days and new disability pensions per cancer patient was reduced. The share occupied by cancer treatment in total healthcare costs decreased slightly from 3.7% to 3.6%, indicating that cancer care has not become more expensive compared to the treatment of other diseases. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first survey to analyse the change in actual cancer costs and outcomes in the population-level within a 10-year period. Since cancer care outcomes in Finland have been among the best in Europe, the progress in terms of the costs and the conversions in the cost distributions across categories are significant and valuable sources for international comparisons.

[Should we start AAA screening in Finland?]. / Onko vatsa-aortan aneurysman seulontaan aihetta suomessa?

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are usually asymptomatic before rupture. Through ultrasound screening AAA can be found before rupture. In Europe England and Sweden have started one-time ultrasound screening for men at age 65. Many studies around Europe have shown that screening is cost-effective. In a recent Finnish study one-time screening for men at age 65 would be a more effective option than the current practice where no screening is offered. Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm among 65-year-old women would entail less additional costs but fewer life years gained than screening for men. Starting the screening would require additional resources in the Finnish health care system as compared to the current policy.

Quality-adjusted life-years for the estimation of effectiveness of screening programs: a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify and characterize studies that have used quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) based on measurements of patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as an indicator of effectiveness of screening programs. METHODS: Systematic search of the literature until March 2010, using several electronic databases. Initial screening of articles based on abstracts, and evaluation of full-text articles were done by at least two of the authors. RESULTS: The search identified 1,610 articles. Based on review of abstracts, 431 full-text articles were obtained for closer inspection and, of these, 81 reported QALYs based on patient-derived data using a valid HRQoL assessment. The most frequently used method to assess HRQoL was Time Trade-Off (55 percent) followed by EQ-5D (26 percent). The most frequently studied medical conditions were malignant diseases (23 percent) followed by cardiovascular diseases (19 percent). All studies employed some kind of modeling with the Markov model being the most prevalent type (65 percent). Majority of the articles (59 percent) concluded that the screening program studied was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: The use of QALYs in the evaluation of screening programs has expanded during the last few years. However, only a minority of studies have used HRQoL data derived from patients, using direct or indirect valuation. Further investigation and harmonization of the methodology in evaluation of screening programs is needed to ensure better comparability across different screening programs.

Cost of a quality-adjusted life year in liver transplantation: the influence of the indication and the model for end-stage liver disease score.

Cost issues in liver transplantation (LT) have received increasing attention, but the cost-utility is rarely calculated. We compared costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) from the time of placement on the LT waiting list to 1 year after transplantation for 252 LT patients and to 5 years after transplantation for 81 patients. We performed separate calculations for chronic liver disease (CLD), acute liver failure (ALF), and different Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. For the estimation of QALYs, the health-related quality of life was measured with the 15D instrument. The median costs and QALYs after LT were €141,768 and 0.895 for 1 year and €177,618 and 3.960 for 5 years, respectively. The costs of the first year were 80% of the 5-year costs. The main cost during years 2 to 5 was immunosuppression drugs (59% of the annual costs). The cost/QALY ratio improved from €158,400/QALY at 1 year to €44,854/QALY at 5 years, and the ratio was more beneficial for CLD patients (€42,500/QALY) versus ALF patients (€63,957/QALY) and for patients with low MELD scores versus patients with high MELD scores. Although patients with CLD and MELD scores > 25 demonstrated markedly higher 5-year costs (€228,434) than patients with MELD scores < 15 (€169,541), the cost/QALY difference was less pronounced (€59,894/QALY and €41,769/QALY, respectively). The cost/QALY ratio for LT appears favorable, but it is dependent on the assessed time period and the severity of the liver disease.

Cost-utility of molecular adsorbent recirculating system treatment in acute liver failure.

AIM: To determine the short-term cost-utility of molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS) treatment in acute liver failure (ALF). METHODS: A controlled retrospective study was conducted with 90 ALF patients treated with MARS from 2001 to 2005. Comparisons were made with a historical control group of 17 ALF patients treated from 2000 to 2001 in the same intensive care unit (ICU) specializing in liver diseases. The 3-year outcomes and number of liver transplantations were recorded. All direct liver disease-related medical expenses from 6 mo before to 3 years after ICU treatment were determined for 31 MARS patients and 16 control patients. The health-related quality of life (HRQoL) before MARS treatment was estimated by a panel of ICU doctors and after MARS using a mailed 15D (15-dimensional generic health-related quality of life instrument) questionnaire. The HRQoL, cost, and survival data were combined and the incremental cost/quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was calculated. RESULTS: In surviving ALF patients, the health-related quality of life after treatment was generally high and comparable to the age- and gender-matched general Finnish population. Compared to the controls, the average cost per QALY was considerably lower in the MARS group (64,732 euros vs 133,858 euros) within a timeframe of 3.5 years. The incremental cost of standard medical treatment alone compared to MARS was 10,928 euros, and the incremental number of QALYs gained by MARS was 0.66. CONCLUSION: MARS treatment combined with standard medical treatment for ALF in an ICU setting is more cost-effective than standard medical treatment alone.

[Cost-utility of bariatric surgery in the treatment for morbid obesity in Finland]. / Sairaalloisen lihavuuden leikkaushoidon kustannusvaikuttavuus Suomessa.

Finohta's health technology assessment report on bariatric surgery included a cost-utility analysis on three main surgical interventions used in Finland. A cost-utility analysis from the health care provider's perspective with a ten year time horizon was conducted. The parameter values were based on a representative population survey, register data, literature and expert opinions. Based on the analysis, bariatric surgery is more effective and less costly than current prevailing forms of treatment for the morbidly obese in Finland. The results were robust and consistent with previously published studies: Bariatric surgery is cost-effective in treatment of morbid obesity.