Budget impact analysis of durvalumab consolidation therapy vs no consolidation therapy after chemoradiotherapy in stage III non-small cell lung cancer in the context of the Chilean health care system.

BACKGROUND: Durvalumab, used as consolidation immunotherapy, has shown to improve survival in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer who respond to chemoradiotherapy, based on the most recent follow-up of PACIFIC. The Chilean healthcare system provides access to certain immunotherapies for this condition. The present study sought to estimate the budget impact of durvalumab versus standard of care in the context of the Chilean healthcare system. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A partitioned survival model was adapted to compare two strategies: durvalumab as consolidation therapy and standard of care for treating stage III NSCLC. The number of patients eligible for treatment was estimated using published incidence data and modeled for a 5-year time horizon. Model inputs were based on published literature, and the duration of treatment was estimated using survival curves obtained from PACIFIC. Costs were estimated in Chilean pesos (CLP) and converted to USD dollars using an exchange rate of USD 1 = CLP 827. Scenario analyses were performed to assess different subsequent therapy splits, variations in the target population and dosage of durvalumab. RESULTS: Durvalumab uptake projected total costs ranging from USD 1.27 in Year 1 to 8.5 million in Year 5 from the public perspective. From the private perspective, the budget impact for the first year is USD 1.3 million to USD 3 million for 2028. This difference relies mostly on the lower number of patients treated. Both perspectives anticipated cost savings over the time horizon through reduced monitoring, adverse events, and end-of-life expenses. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the inclusion of Durvalumab for NSCLC in Chile represents an investment in the Chilean health system. The incremental costs align with clinical benefits and potential savings in healthcare resource utilization. However, a comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis is needed to evaluate its economic value thoroughly.

Effect of photobiomodulation on the severity of oral mucositis and molecular changes in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy: a study protocol for a cost-effectiveness randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis (OM) is the most frequent and debilitating acute side effect associated with head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment. When present, severe OM negatively impacts the quality of life of patients undergoing HNC treatment. Photobiomodulation is a well-consolidated and effective therapy for the treatment and prevention of severe OM, and is associated with a cost reduction of the cancer treatment. Although an increase in the quality of life and a reduction in the severity of OM are well described, there is no study on cost-effectiveness for this approach considering the quality of life as a primary outcome. In addition, little is known about the photobiomodulation effects on salivary inflammatory mediators. Thus, this study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the photobiomodulation therapy for the prevention and control of severe OM and its influence on the salivary inflammatory mediators. METHODS/DESIGN: This randomized, double-blind clinical trial will include 50 HNC patients undergoing radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. The participants will be randomized into two groups: intervention group (photobiomodulation) and control group (preventive oral care protocol). OM (clinical assessment), saliva (assessment of collected samples) and quality of life (Oral Health Impact Profile-14 and Patient-Reported Oral Mucositis Symptoms questionnaires) will be assessed at the 1st, 7th, 14th, 21st and 30th radiotherapy sessions. Oxidative stress and inflammatory cytokine levels will be measured in the saliva samples of all participants. The costs are identified, measured and evaluated considering the radiotherapy time interval. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will be estimated. The study will be conducted according to the Brazilian public health system perspective. DISCUSSION: Photobiomodulation is an effective therapy that reduces the cost associated with OM treatment. However, little is known about its cost-effectiveness, mainly when quality of life is the effectiveness measure. Additionally, this therapy is not supported by the Brazilian public health system. Therefore, this study widens the knowledge about the safety of and strengthens evidence for the use of photobiomodulation therapy, providing information for public policy-makers and also for dental care professionals. This study is strongly encouraged due to its clinical relevance and the possibility of incorporating new technology into public health systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials-ReBEC, RBR-5h4y4n . Registered on 13 June 2017.

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.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of cisplatin-based chemoradiation to treat patients with unresectable, nonmetastatic head and neck cancer in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of cisplatin-based chemoradiation compared to radiation therapy (RT) alone to treat patients with advanced head and neck cancer in Brazil. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from the medical records of 33 patients treated with RT alone (strategy 1) and from 29 patients treated with cisplatin-based chemoradiation (strategy 2). The Brazilian National Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde [SUS]) reimbursement parameters perspective was considered, and the effectiveness was measured in years of disease-free life gained. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to determine robustness of this study. RESULTS: In strategy 1, there were 31% of the patients who lived without disease progression for more than 13 months after treatment, compared to 58% of patients in strategy 2. According to SUS parameters, the total cost per patient in strategy 1 was $1,167.00 U.S. dollars and in strategy 2, it was $2,058.00 U.S. dollars. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $3,303.00 U.S. dollars per life-year gained. CONCLUSION: Cisplatin-based chemoradiation proved to be more cost-effective than RT alone.