Spend less to achieve more: Economic analysis of intermittent versus continuous cetuximab in KRAS wild-type patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the COIN-B clinical trial demonstrated that intermittent cetuximab (IC) was a safe alternative to continuous cetuximab (CC), with less cytotoxic chemotherapy, in first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Cetuximab has been available for this indication in England since 2015, but treatment breaks beyond 6 weeks were prohibited, despite real-world evidence that therapy de-escalation maintains equivalent disease control, but with superior Quality-of-Life (QoL). We performed health economic analyses of IC versus CC and used this evidence to help underpin policy change and guide clinical practice through reduction in unnecessary treatment for mCRC patients. METHODS: Employing cost-minimization analysis, we conducted partitioned survival modelling (PSM) and Markov Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) simulation to determine costs and quality-adjusted-life-years for IC versus CC. RESULTS: IC reduced costs by £â€¯35,763 (PSM; p < 0.001) or £â€¯30,189 (MCMC) per patient annually, while preserving treatment efficacy and enhancing QoL. Extrapolating to all mCRC patients eligible for cetuximab therapy would have generated cost savings of ~£â€¯1.2 billion over this cohort's lifetime. These data helped underpin a request to NHS England to remove treatment break restrictions in first-line mCRC therapy, which has been adopted as an interim treatment option policy in colorectal cancer during the Covid-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight substantial cost savings achievable by treatment de-escalation, while also reinforcing the importance of therapy breaks to potentially increase tumour responsiveness and reduce treatment toxicity. Our study also highlights how health economic evidence can influence health policy, championing reduced treatment intensity approaches without compromising patient outcomes, which is of particular relevance when addressing the reduced capacity and treatment backlogs experienced during the pandemic.

3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with high-risk stage II and III colorectal cancer: 3-year follow-up of the SCOT non-inferiority RCT.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy administered over 6 months is the standard adjuvant regimen for patients with high-risk stage II or III colorectal cancer. However, the regimen is associated with cumulative toxicity, characterised by chronic and often irreversible neuropathy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of 3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer and to compare the toxicity, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the durations. DESIGN: An international, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, Phase III, parallel-group trial. SETTING: A total of 244 oncology clinics from six countries: UK (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland), Denmark, Spain, Sweden, Australia and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged ≥ 18 years who had undergone curative resection for high-risk stage II or III adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum. INTERVENTIONS: The adjuvant treatment regimen was either oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil or oxaliplatin and capecitabine, randomised to be administered over 3 or 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was disease-free survival. Overall survival, adverse events, neuropathy and health-related quality of life were also assessed. The main cost categories were chemotherapy treatment and hospitalisation. Cost-effectiveness was assessed through incremental cost comparisons and quality-adjusted life-year gains between the options and was reported as net monetary benefit using a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year per patient. RESULTS: Recruitment is closed. In total, 6088 patients were randomised (3044 per group) between 27 March 2008 and 29 November 2013, with 6065 included in the intention-to-treat analyses (3-month analysis, n = 3035; 6-month analysis, n = 3030). Follow-up for the primary analysis is complete. The 3-year disease-free survival rate in the 3-month treatment group was 76.7% (standard error 0.8%) and in the 6-month treatment group was 77.1% (standard error 0.8%), equating to a hazard ratio of 1.006 (95% confidence interval 0.909 to 1.114; p-value for non-inferiority = 0.012), confirming non-inferiority for 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy. Frequent adverse events (alopecia, anaemia, anorexia, diarrhoea, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis, sensory neuropathy, neutropenia, pain, rash, altered taste, thrombocytopenia and watery eye) showed a significant increase in grade with 6-month duration; the greatest difference was for sensory neuropathy (grade ≥ 3 was 4% for 3-month vs.16% for 6-month duration), for which a higher rate of neuropathy was seen for the 6-month treatment group from month 4 to ≥ 5 years (p < 0.001). Quality-of-life scores were better in the 3-month treatment group over months 4-6. A cost-effectiveness analysis showed 3-month treatment to cost £4881 less over the 8-year analysis period, with an incremental net monetary benefit of £7246 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: The study achieved its primary end point, showing that 3-month oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy is non-inferior to 6 months of the same regimen; 3-month treatment showed a better safety profile and cost less. For future work, further follow-up will refine long-term estimates of the duration effect on disease-free survival and overall survival. The health economic analysis will be updated to include long-term extrapolation for subgroups. We expect these analyses to be available in 2019-20. The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study translational samples may allow the identification of patients who would benefit from longer treatment based on the molecular characteristics of their disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN59757862 and EudraCT 2007-003957-10. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This research was supported by the Medical Research Council (transferred to NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre - Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; grant reference G0601705), the Swedish Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK Core Clinical Trials Unit Funding (funding reference C6716/A9894).

Patients diagnosed with bowel cancer are likely to have surgery to remove the tumour. Patients diagnosed with a more advanced stage of the disease are then likely to be offered what is known as adjuvant chemotherapy ­ chemotherapy to kill any cancer cells that have already spread but cannot be seen. Adjuvant chemotherapy is usually given over 6 months using two medicines known as oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine. This chemotherapy has side effects of diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting, and it reduces the numbers of cells in the blood. It can also damage nerves, which causes discomfort, numbness and tingling; in some cases, this can go on for years. These side effects are more likely to develop with longer treatment. This study looked at whether or not shortening the time over which patients were given oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy reduced its effectiveness. In this large study of over 6000 patients, half of the patients were allocated by chance to be treated for 3 months and the other half to be treated for 6 months. Reducing the time that patients had chemotherapy from 6 months to 3 months did not make the treatment less effective. When patients treated with chemotherapy over 3 months were compared with those treated over 6 months, 77% of patients in both groups were well with no detectable disease 3 years after surgery. Patients were less likely to get side effects with 3-month chemotherapy. In particular, the chance of persistent long-term nerve damage was lower, resulting in patients with 3-month chemotherapy having better health-related quality of life. Overall, the study showed that 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with bowel cancer is as effective as 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy and causes fewer side effects.

SCOT: a comparison of cost-effectiveness from a large randomised phase III trial of two durations of adjuvant Oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study is an international, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial assessing the efficacy, toxicity, and cost-effectiveness of 3 months (3 M) versus the usually given 6 months (6 M) of adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer. METHODS: In total, 6088 patients with fully resected high-risk stage II or stage III colorectal cancer were randomised and followed up for 3-8 years. The within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis from a UK health-care perspective is presented using the resource use data, quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), time on treatment (ToT), disease-free survival after treatment (DFS) and overall survival (OS) data. Quality-adjusted partitioned survival analysis and Kaplan-Meier Sample Average Estimator estimated QALYs and costs. Probabilistic sensitivity and subgroup analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: The 3 M arm is less costly (-£4881; 95% CI: -£6269; -£3492) and entails (non-significant) QALY gains (0.08; 95% CI: -0.086; 0.230) due to a better significant quality of life. The net monetary benefit was significantly higher in 3 M under a wide range of monetary values of a QALY. The subgroup analysis found similar results for patients in the CAPOX regimen. However, for the FOLFOX regimen, 3 M had lower QALYs than 6 M (not statistically significant). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 3 M dominates 6 M with no significant detrimental impact on QALYs. The results provide the economic case that a 3 M treatment strategy should be considered a new standard of care.

Reproducibility of quantitative assessment of altered hepatic hemodynamics with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate the reproducibility of quantitative assessment of altered hepatic hemodynamics with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound. METHODS: Fifteen patients with colorectal liver metastases and 5 volunteers were studied. The hepatic artery proper and the portal vein were imaged simultaneously with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound. The examination was repeated with 2 different contrast bolus volumes (1.2 and 2.4 mL), and time-intensity curves were formed from dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound image loops. The rise time, peak intensity, and wash-in slope were derived from hepatic artery and portal vein time-intensity curves. Inter-reader, intra-reader, and inter-scan agreement was assessed by 2 independent readers. Quantitative (intraclass correlation coefficients and coefficients of variation [CVs]) and qualitative (Landis and Koch classification) analyses were performed. RESULTS: Intra-reader and inter-reader agreement was "almost perfect" for the hepatic artery (CV, 10%-15% and 8%-9%, respectively), portal vein (CV, 5%-8% and 6%-12%), and hepatic artery/portal vein ratio (CV, 8%-14% and 10%-15%) measurements of 3 all studied parameters. In contrast, inter-scan agreement was only "slight" to "moderate" (CV, 25%-27%) and "fair" to "moderate" (CV, 19%-24%) for rise time and peak intensity measurements in the hepatic artery and portal vein, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative assessment of altered hepatic hemodynamics with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound is reproducible provided that measurements in the hepatic artery are normalized by those in the portal vein.

Assessment of global liver blood flow with quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the potential of quantitative analysis of contrast bolus kinetics to reflect global liver blood flow. METHODS: A dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound flow phantom was developed. A peristaltic pump established constant volume flow ranging between 16.5 and 49.5 mL/min (2-mm tube) and 85.5 and 256.5 mL/min (5-mm tube). After bolus injection of 2 doses of a contrast agent, a region of interest was drawn over the cross section of the tube used for a particular acquisition; the rise time, peak intensity, and wash-in slope were derived from time-intensity curves. Twenty healthy volunteers and 25 patients with biopsy-proven colorectal liver metastases were scanned with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound. The rise time, peak intensity, and wash-in slope were derived from hepatic artery and portal vein time-intensity curves. Hepatic artery/portal vein ratios of the parameters were also calculated. RESULTS: In the in vitro experiment, the rise time decreased while the peak intensity and wash-in slope increased with increasing volume flow for both tube diameters and contrast bolus volumes. In the clinical study, the rise time was lowered in the hepatic artery but elevated in the portal vein, and the peak intensity and wash-in slope were elevated in the hepatic artery but lowered in the portal vein in patients with colorectal liver metastases compared with healthy volunteers, although not in a statistically significant manner. This finding was consistent with an increase in hepatic artery blood flow, a decrease in portal vein blood flow, or both in patients with colorectal liver metastases compared with healthy volunteers. Only the 3 hepatic artery/portal vein ratios of the parameters achieved statistical significance in differentiating healthy volunteers from patients with colorectal liver metastases (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Surrogate measurements of liver blood flow may be derived from quantitative analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound studies. They may have potential for quick and easy assessment of altered hepatic hemodynamics.

Assessment of response to treatment of unresectable liver tumours with 90Y microspheres: value of FDG PET versus computed tomography.

INTRODUCTION: Selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) with SIR spheres (90Y microspheres) is a treatment option for liver tumours in patients in whom other therapies are inappropriate or have failed. This study aims to assess the value of FDG PET in assessing the response to SIRT as compared to computed tomography (CT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients (11 F, 10 M; age range 40-75 years, mean, 58 years) received SIR spheres at the Hammersmith Hospital. One patient received two treatments. Most patients had colorectal metastases (n=10), while the others (n=11) had liver metastasis from different primaries. The mean administered dose was 1.9 GBq (range, 1.2-2.5 GBq). Follow-up was done with FDG PET and CT at 6 weeks, and 6-monthly thereafter. Pre-therapy and post-therapy CT and PET scans were assessed visually (RECIST criteria for CT) and semi-quantitative for PET using the standardized uptake value (SUV). RESULT: Eighty-six percent of patients showed decreased PET activity at 6 weeks while only 13% showed a partial response in the size of tumour on CT scan. The mean pre-treatment SUV was 12.2+/-3.7 and the mean post-treatment SUV was 9.3+/-3.7 (P=0.01). CT imaging showed progressive disease in 27% patients and stable liver disease in 60% patients. Based on FDG PET results one patient had surgery for down-staged tumour. CONCLUSION: FDG PET imaging is more sensitive than CT in the assessment of early response to SIR spheres, allowing clinicians to proceed with further therapeutic options.