Cost-Effectiveness of Proton Versus Photon Therapy in Pediatric Medulloblastoma Treatment: A Patient Volume-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Proton radiation therapy offers advantages over photon therapy, assisting with severe side effect avoidance. Pediatric patients with medulloblastoma have demonstrated benefit from this technology in recently published cohort studies. OBJECTIVES: To compare the costs and benefits between proton and photon therapy in treating pediatric medulloblastoma. METHODS: The model was built with a lifetime horizon from the Brazilian health system perspective using a 3% discount rate. A microsimulation model was developed after a literature search, comparing scenarios of equipment life span and number of patients treated per year (50, 100, and 150 patients with 10, 25, and 20 years of equipment life span). The baseline parameters were 50 patients treated annually and 20 years of equipment life span. RESULTS: The quality-adjusted life-year gain was 2.71, and the average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $34 590.54 per quality-adjusted life-year. For the willingness-to-pay threshold of 1 gross domestic product per capita, it was observed that the incorporation of the technology would be cost-effective if more than 150 patients were treated per year. The weight of the equipment life span and other variables was limited when it varied in the sensitivity analysis, without significant changes to the model results. CONCLUSIONS: Proton therapy is not cost-effective for pediatric medulloblastoma treatment from the Brazilian health system perspective. The investment is not worth when considering the number of potential patients and the country dimensions.

Cost-effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in head and neck cancer patients receiving concurrent chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis is a major event increasing treatment costs of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients treated with chemoradiation (CRT). This study was designed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) to prevent oral mucositis in HNSCC patients receiving CRT. METHODS: From June 2007 to December 2010, 94 patients with HNSCC of nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx entered a prospective, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial. CRT consisted of conventional radiotherapy (RT: 70.2 Gy, 1.8 Gy/d, 5 times/wk)+concurrent cisplatin (100mg/m2) every 3 weeks. An InGaAlP (660 nm-100 mW-4J/cm2) laser diode was used for LLLT. RESULTS: From the perspective of Brazil's public health care system (SUS), total costs were higher in Placebo Group (PG) than Laser Group (LG) for opioid use (LG=US$ 9.08, PG=US$ 44.28), gastrostomy feeding (LG=US$ 50.50, PG=US$ 129.86), and hospitalization (PG=US$ 77.03). In LG, the cost was higher for laser therapy only (US$ 1880.57). The total incremental cost associated with the use of LLLT was US$ 1689.00 per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was US$ 4961.37 per grade 3-4 OM case prevented compared to no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that morbidity was lower in the Laser Group and that LLLT was more cost-effective than placebo up to a threshold of at least US$ 5000 per mucositis case prevented. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: NCT01439724.