Clinical and economic outcomes of adding [18F]FES PET/CT in estrogen receptor status identification in metastatic and recurrent breast cancer in the US.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Correct identification of estrogen receptor (ER) status in breast cancer (BC) is crucial to optimize treatment; however, standard of care, involving biopsy and immunohistochemistry (IHC), and other diagnostic tools such as 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose or 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ([18F]FDG), can yield inconclusive results. 16α-[18F]fluoro-17ß-fluoroestradiol ([18F]FES) can be a powerful tool, providing high diagnostic accuracy of ER-positive disease. The aim of this study was to estimate the budget impact and cost-effectiveness of adding [18F]FES PET/CT to biopsy/IHC in the determination of ER-positive status in metastatic (mBC) and recurrent breast cancer (rBC) in the United States (US). METHODS: An Excel-based decision tree, combined with a Markov model, was developed to estimate the economic consequences of adding [18F]FES PET/CT to biopsy/IHC for determining ER-positive status in mBC and rBC over 5 years. Scenario A, where the determination of ER-positive status is carried out solely through biopsy/IHC, was compared to scenario B, where [18F]FES PET/CT is used in addition to biopsy/IHC. RESULTS: The proportion of true positive and true negative test results increased by 0.2 to 8.0 percent points in scenario B compared to scenario A, while re-biopsies were reduced by 94% to 100%. Scenario B resulted in cost savings up to 142 million dollars. CONCLUSIONS: Adding [18F]FES PET/CT to biopsy/IHC may increase the diagnostic accuracy of the ER status, especially when a tumor sample cannot be obtained, or the risk of a biopsy-related complication is high. Therefore, adding [18F]FES PET/CT to biopsy/IHC would have a positive impact on US clinical and economic outcomes.

The value of microvascular breast reconstruction: Cost equivalence of TRAM and DIEP flaps implications in the era of CMS reforms.

BACKGROUND: Recent CMS billing changes have raised concerns about insurance coverage for deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction. This study compared the costs and utilization of transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM), DIEP, and latissimus dorsi (LD) flaps in breast reconstruction. METHOD: The study utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to identify female patients who underwent DIEP, TRAM, and LD flap procedures from 2016 to 2019. Key data such as patient demographics, length of stay, complications, and costs (adjusted to 2021 USD) were analyzed, focusing on differences across the flap types. RESULTS: A total of 17,770 weighted patient encounters were identified, with the median age being 51. The majority underwent DIEP flaps (73.5%), followed by TRAM (14.2%) and LD (12.1%) flaps. The findings revealed that DIEP and TRAM flaps had a similar length of stay (LOS), while LD flaps typically had a shorter LOS. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio were also comparable between DIEP and TRAM flaps, whereas LD flaps were significantly less expensive. Factors such as income quartile, primary payer of hospitalization, and geographic region significantly influenced flap choice. CONCLUSION: The study's results appear to contradict the prevailing notion that TRAM flaps are more cost-effective than DIEP flaps. The total hospital charges to costs using cost-to-charge ratio and hospital stays associated with TRAM and DIEP flaps were found to be similar. These findings suggest that changes in the insurance landscape, which may limit the use of DIEP flaps, could undermine patient autonomy while not necessarily reducing healthcare costs. Such policy shifts could favor less costly options like the LD flap, potentially altering the landscape of microvascular breast reconstruction.

Is the QCI framework suited for monitoring outcomes and costs in a teaching hospital using value-based healthcare principles? A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective is to develop a pragmatic framework, based on value-based healthcare principles, to monitor health outcomes per unit costs on an institutional level. Subsequently, we investigated the association between health outcomes and healthcare utilisation costs. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A teaching hospital in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: The study was performed in two use cases. The bariatric population contained 856 patients of which 639 were diagnosed with morbid obesity body mass index (BMI) <45 and 217 were diagnosed with morbid obesity BMI ≥45. The breast cancer population contained 663 patients of which 455 received a lumpectomy and 208 a mastectomy. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The quality cost indicator (QCI) was the primary measures and was defined asQCI = (resulting outcome * 100)/average total costs (per thousand Euros)where average total costs entail all healthcare utilisation costs with regard to the treatment of the primary diagnosis and follow-up care. Resulting outcome is the number of patients achieving textbook outcome (passing all health outcome indicators) divided by the total number of patients included in the care path. RESULTS: The breast cancer and bariatric population had the highest resulting outcome values in 2020 Q4, 0.93 and 0.73, respectively. The average total costs of the bariatric population remained stable (avg, €8833.55, min €8494.32, max €9164.26). The breast cancer population showed higher variance in costs (avg, €12 735.31 min €12 188.83, max €13 695.58). QCI values of both populations showed similar variance (0.3 and 0.8). Failing health outcome indicators was significantly related to higher hospital-based costs of care in both populations (p <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The QCI framework is effective for monitoring changes in average total costs and relevant health outcomes on an institutional level. Health outcomes are associated with hospital-based costs of care.

Health utility values of breast cancer treatments and the impact of varying quality of life assumptions on cost-effectiveness.

In breast cancer research, utility assumptions are outdated and inconsistent which may affect the results of quality adjusted life year (QALY) calculations and thereby cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). Four hundred sixty four female patients with breast cancer treated at Erasmus MC, the Netherlands, completed EQ-5D-5L questionnaires from diagnosis throughout their treatment. Average utilities were calculated stratified by age and treatment. These utilities were applied in CEAs analysing 920 breast cancer screening policies differing in eligible ages and screening interval simulated by the MISCAN-Breast microsimulation model, using a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000. The CEAs included varying sets on normative, breast cancer treatment and screening and follow-up utilities. Efficiency frontiers were compared to assess the impact of the utility sets. The calculated average patient utilities were reduced at breast cancer diagnosis and 6 months after surgery and increased toward normative utilities 12 months after surgery. When using normative utility values of 1 in CEAs, QALYs were overestimated compared to using average gender and age-specific values. Only small differences in QALYs gained were seen when varying treatment utilities in CEAs. The CEAs varying screening and follow-up utilities showed only small changes in QALYs gained and the efficiency frontier. Throughout all variations in utility sets, the optimal strategy remained robust; biennial for ages 40-76 years and occasionally biennial 40-74 years. In sum, we recommend to use gender and age stratified normative utilities in CEAs, and patient-based breast cancer utilities stratified by age and treatment or disease stage. Furthermore, despite varying utilities, the optimal screening scenario seems very robust.

Cost-Effectiveness of Radar Localisation Versus Wire Localisation for Wide Local Excision of Non-palpable Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Wire localisation (WL) is the "gold standard" localisation technique for wide local excision (WLE) of non-palpable breast lesions but has disadvantages that have led to the development of wireless techniques. This study compared the cost-effectiveness of radar localisation (RL) to WL. METHODS: This was a single-institution study of 110 prospective patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing WLE using RL with the SCOUT® Surgical Guidance System (2021-2023) compared with a cohort of 110 patients using WL. Margin status, re-excision rates, and surgery delays associated with preoperative localisation were compared. Costs from a third-party payer perspective in Australian dollars (AUD$) calculated by using microcosting, break-even point, and cost-utility analyses. RESULTS: A total of 110 WLEs using RL cost a total of AUD$402,281, in addition to the device cost of AUD$77,150. The average additional cost of a surgery delay was AUD$2318. Use of RL reduced the surgery delay rate by 10% (p = 0.029), preventing 11 delays with cost savings of AUD$25,496. No differences were identified in positive margin rates (RL: 11.8% vs. WL: 17.3%, p = 0.25) or re-excision rates (RL: 14.5% vs. WL: 21.8%, p = 0.221). In total, 290 RL cases are needed to break even. The cost of WLE using RL was greater than WL by AUD$567. There was a greater clinical benefit of 1.15 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and an incremental cost-utility ratio of AUD$493 per QALY favouring RL. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of RL was a more cost-effective intervention than WL. Close to 300 RL cases are likely needed to be performed to recover costs of the medical device. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12624000068561.

Contemporary Analysis of Reexcision and Conversion to Mastectomy Rates and Associated Healthcare Costs for Women Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date understanding of population-level reoperation rates and incremental healthcare costs associated with reoperation for patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using Merative™ MarketScan® commercial insurance data and Medicare 5% fee-for-service claims data. The study included females aged 18-64 years in the commercial cohort and females aged 18 years and older in the Medicare cohort, who underwent initial BCS for breast cancer in 2017-2019. Reoperation rates within a year of the initial BCS and overall 1-year healthcare costs stratified by reoperation status were measured. RESULTS: The commercial cohort included 17,129 women with a median age of 55 (interquartile range [IQR] 49-59) years, and the Medicare cohort included 6977 women with a median age of 73 (IQR 69-78) years. Overall reoperation rates were 21.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.5-21.8%) for the commercial cohort and 14.9% (95% CI 14.1-15.7%) for the Medicare cohort. In both cohorts, reoperation rates decreased as age increased, and conversion to mastectomy was more prevalent among younger women in the commercial cohort. The mean healthcare costs during 1 year of follow-up from the initial BCS were $95,165 for the commercial cohort and $36,313 for the Medicare cohort. Reoperations were associated with 24% higher costs in both the commercial and Medicare cohorts, which translated into $21,607 and $8559 incremental costs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of reoperation after BCS have remained high and have contributed to increased healthcare costs. Continuing efforts to reduce reoperation need more attention.

Financial (dis)incentives to surgical management of head and neck cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) often require complex surgical reconstruction. This retrospective, cross-sectional study compares financial factors influencing HNC and breast cancer (BC) care to examine care disparities. METHODS: Pricing data from 2012 to 2021 was abstracted from the CMS Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool. Nonprofit and research support was quantified by searching the NIH, IRS, and GuideStar databases. New York State Department of Health data from 2015 to 2019 was analyzed to compare costs, charges, and payer mix. RESULTS: HNC reconstructive procedures reimburse lower than comparable breast procedures (p < 0.05). Nonprofit and research support for HNC is disproportionately low relative to disease burden. Patients hospitalized for HNC surgical procedures generated higher costs and lower charges than patients with BC (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Comparatively low procedure reimbursement, low nonprofit support, and high cost of care for patients with HNC relative to patients with BC may contribute to care disparities for patients with HNC.

Cancer Screening after the Adoption of Paid-Sick-Leave Mandates.

BACKGROUND: By the end of 2022, nearly 20 million workers in the United States have gained paid-sick-leave coverage from mandates that require employers to provide benefits to qualified workers, including paid time off for the use of preventive services. Although the lack of paid-sick-leave coverage may hinder access to preventive care, current evidence is insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions about its relationship to cancer screening. METHODS: We examined the association between paid-sick-leave mandates and screening for breast and colorectal cancers by comparing changes in 12- and 24-month rates of colorectal-cancer screening and mammography between workers residing in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) that have been affected by paid-sick-leave mandates (exposed MSAs) and workers residing in unexposed MSAs. The comparisons were conducted with the use of administrative medical-claims data for approximately 2 million private-sector employees from 2012 through 2019. RESULTS: Paid-sick-leave mandates were present in 61 MSAs in our sample. Screening rates were similar in the exposed and unexposed MSAs before mandate adoption. In the adjusted analysis, cancer-screening rates were higher among workers residing in exposed MSAs than among those in unexposed MSAs by 1.31 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 2.34) for 12-month colorectal cancer screening, 1.56 percentage points (95% CI, 0.33 to 2.79) for 24-month colorectal cancer screening, 1.22 percentage points (95% CI, -0.20 to 2.64) for 12-month mammography, and 2.07 percentage points (95% CI, 0.15 to 3.99) for 24-month mammography. CONCLUSIONS: In a sample of private-sector workers in the United States, cancer-screening rates were higher among those residing in MSAs exposed to paid-sick-leave mandates than among those residing in unexposed MSAs. Our results suggest that a lack of paid-sick-leave coverage presents a barrier to cancer screening. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute.).

Implementation of Systematic Financial Screening in an Outpatient Breast Oncology Setting.

PURPOSE: Implementation of routine financial screening is a critical step toward mitigating financial toxicity. We evaluated the feasibility, sustainability, and acceptability of systematic financial screening in the outpatient breast oncology clinic at a large, urban cancer center. METHODS: We developed and implemented a stakeholder-informed process to systematically screen for financial hardship and worry. A 2-item assessment in English or Spanish was administered to patients through the electronic medical record portal or using paper forms. We evaluated completion rates and mode of completion. Through feedback from patients, clinicians, and staff, we identified strategies to improve completion rates and acceptability. RESULTS: From March, 2021, to February, 2022, 3,500 patients were seen in the breast oncology clinic. Of them, 39% (n = 1,349) responded to the screening items, either by paper or portal, 12% (n = 437) preferred not to answer, and the remaining 49% (n = 1,714) did not have data in their electronic health record, meaning they were not offered screening or did not complete the paper forms. Young adults (18-39 years) were more likely to respond compared with patients 70 years or older (61% v 30%, P < .01). English-preferring patients were more likely to complete the screening compared with those who preferred Spanish (46% v 28%, P < .01). Non-Hispanic White patients were more likely to respond compared with Non-Hispanic Black patients and with Hispanic patients (46% v 39% v 32%, P < .01). Strategies to improve completion rates included partnering with staff to facilitate paper form administration, optimizing patient engagement with the portal, and clearly communicating the purpose of the screening. CONCLUSION: Systematic financial screening is feasible, and electronic data capture facilitates successful implementation. However, inclusive procedures that address language and technology preferences are needed to optimize screening.

Breast, Cervical, and Lung Cancer: A comparison of Real Healthcare Costs and INA-CBGs Rates in the Era of National Health Insurance

Background: In Indonesia, the cost of cancer treatment has been determined by the Indonesian Case Base Groups (INA-CBGs) based on a code called the INA-CBG’s rates. However, a fair claim should be based on the severity of the disease and the class of treatment in the hospital, not on the rates of code. In fact, the real cost of therapy for cancer is influenced by several factors including stage, comorbidity, and severity (INA-CBGs coding, type of hospital, hospital class, treatment grade, side effects, and length of stay), so in many cases, there are reported differences between the real costs and the INA-CBGs rates charged to patients. Objective: This study aims to investigate the difference between real treatment costs and INA-CBG’s rates for cases of lung cancer, cervical cancer, and breast cancer at a cancer center hospital in Indonesia. Methods: This work uses an observational study, and the data were taken retrospectively from hospital financial data and patient medical records. The data were then analyzed using a one-sample t-test to determine the difference between real costs and INA-CBGs costs. Results: The results showed that there was no significant difference between real costs and INA-CBG’s cost on stage II lung cancer treatment in grade 2 with a sig. value of 0.683; code C-4-13-II in grade 3 with a sig. value of 0.151; and code C-4-13-III in grade 3 with a sig. value of 0.650; where the significance level (t alpha) is more than 0.05. Furthermore, the treatment costs for cervical cancer with codes C-4- 13-I and C-4-13-II in grade 1 had sig. values of 0.155 and 0.720 respectively. Lastly, the treatment cost for breast cancer patients with codes C-4-12-II in grade 3 had a sig. value of 0.145 and code C-4-13-II in grade 3 showed a sig. value of 0.091. (AU)

Understanding the role of access in Hispanic cancer screening disparities.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic populations in the United States experience numerous barriers to care access. It is unclear how cancer screening disparities between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White individuals are explained by access to care, including having a usual source of care and health insurance coverage. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the 2019 National Health Interview Survey was conducted and included respondents who were sex- and age-eligible for cervical (n = 8316), breast (n = 6025), or colorectal cancer screening (n = 11,313). The proportion of ever screened and up to date for each screening type was compared.  Regression models evaluated whether controlling for reporting a usual source of care and type of health insurance (public, private, none) attenuated disparities between Hispanics and non-Hispanic White individuals. RESULTS: Hispanic individuals were less likely than non-Hispanic White individuals to be up to date with cervical cancer screening (71.6% vs. 74.6%) and colorectal cancer screening (52.9% vs. 70.3%), but up-to-date screening was similar for breast cancer (78.8% vs. 76.3%). Hispanic individuals (vs. non-Hispanic White) were less likely to have a usual source of care (77.9% vs. 86.0%) and more likely to be uninsured (23.6% vs. 7.1%). In regressions, insurance fully attenuated cervical cancer disparities. Controlling for both usual source of care and insurance type explained approximately half of the colorectal cancer screening disparities (adjusted risk difference: -8.3 [-11.2 to -4.8]). CONCLUSION: Addressing the high rate of uninsurance among Hispanic individuals could mitigate cancer screening disparities. Future research should build on the relative successes of breast cancer screening and investigate additional barriers for colorectal cancer screening. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This study uses data from a national survey to compare cancer screening use those who identify as Hispanic with those who identify as non-Hispanic White. Those who identify as Hispanic are much less likely to be up to date with colorectal cancer screening than those who identify as non-Hispanic White, slightly less likely to be up to date on cervical cancer screening, and similarly likely to receive breast cancer screening. Improving insurance coverage is important for health equity, as is further exploring what drives higher use of breast cancer screening and lower use of colorectal cancer screening.

Radiotherapy Deserts: The Impact of Race, Poverty, and the Rural-Urban Continuum on Density of Providers and the Use of Radiation Therapy in the US.

PURPOSE: Prior efforts to characterize disparities in radiation therapy access and receipt have not comprehensively investigated interplay between race, socioeconomic status, and geography relative to oncologic outcomes. This study sought to define these complex relationships at the US county level for prostate cancer (PC) and invasive breast (BC) cancer to build a tool that facilitates identification of "radiotherapy deserts"-regions with mismatch between radiation therapy resources and oncologic need. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An ecologic study model was constructed using national databases to evaluate 3,141 US counties. Radiation therapy resources and use densities were operationalized as physicians to persons at risk (PPR) and use to persons at risk (UPR): the number of attending radiation oncologists and Medicare beneficiaries per 100,000 persons at risk, respectively. Oncologic need was defined by "hot zone" counties with ≥2 standard deviations (SDs) above mean incidence and death rates. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions examined links between PPR and UPR densities, epidemiologic variables, and hot zones for oncologic outcomes. Statistics are reported at a significance level of P < .05. RESULTS: The mean (SD) PPR and UPR densities were 2.1 (5.9) and 192.6 (557.6) for PC and 1.9 (5.3) and 174.4 (501.0) for BC, respectively. Counties with high PPR and UPR densities were predominately metropolitan (odds ratio [OR], 2.9-4.4), generally with a higher percentage of Black non-Hispanic constituents (OR, 1.5-2.3). Incidence and death rate hot zones were largely nonmetropolitan (OR, 0.3-0.6), generally with a higher percentage of Black non-Hispanic constituents (OR, 3.2-6.3). Lower PPR density was associated with death rate hot zones for both types of cancer (OR, 0.8-0.9); UPR density was generally not linked to oncologic outcomes on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The study found that mismatch between oncologic need with PPR and UPR disproportionately affects nonmetropolitan communities with a higher percentage of Black non-Hispanic constituents. An interactive web platform (bit.ly/densitymaps) was developed to visualize "radiotherapy deserts" and drive targeted investigation of underlying barriers to care in areas of highest need, with the goal of reducing health inequities in this context.

The economic value of knowing BRCA status: universal BRCA testing for breast cancer prevention.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to estimate the incremental lifetime effects, costs, and net monetary benefit (NMB) of knowing BRCA information by universal genetic testing of all US women without breast cancer turning 40 in a given year, and the cumulative savings or losses of yearly cohort testing over 16 years. We compared two strategies: (1) 'with BRCA information' and (2) 'without BRCA information.' METHODS: Incremental NMB (INMB) was calculated as the monetized benefit per person of knowing BRCA status. The net monetized value (cumulated INMB) of knowing BRCA information was estimated by multiplying the INMB with the eligible population or the year 2020 cohort of US women age 40 and extended for a total of 16 yearly cohorts. RESULTS: Universal testing of the female population at the age of 40 in a given year provided aan INMB of $663/person (payer) and $1,006/person (society).Escalated to the U.S. population of women age 40 , knowing BRCA status resulted in lifetime cumulated INMB of $1.3 billion (payer) and $2.0 billion (society) for the 2020 cohort; and yielded accumulated monetized value of $18.3 billion (payer) and $27.6 billion (society) over 16 yearly cohorts of 40-year-old women. CONCLUSIONS: The universal testing for BRCA status of all US women at age 40 provides compelling short-term and long-term economic value.

What affects the public healthcare costs of breast cancer in New Zealand?

BACKGROUNDS: The pressure to the healthcare system for providing ongoing monitoring and treatment for breast cancer survivors is increasing. This study aims to identify the factors that affect the public healthcare costs of stage I-III breast cancer and stage IV cancer in New Zealand. METHODS: We identified women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2018 and who received services in a public hospital. Patients were identified from the National Breast Cancer Register and/or New Zealand Cancer Registry and were linked to the national administrative datasets. A two-part model was used to identify the factors that affect the public healthcare costs of stage I-III breast cancer and stage IV cancer. RESULTS: We identified 16,977 stage I-III and 1,093 stage IV breast cancer patients eligible for this study. The costs of stage I-III cancer in the second to fifth year post diagnosis decreased over time, and the costs of stage IV cancer in the first year post diagnosis increased over time. After adjustment for other factors, the costs of stage I-IV cancer decreased with age but increased with cancer stage. HER2+ cancers had the highest costs, followed by triple negative cancers. After adjustment for other factors, Pacific and Asian women had lower costs, and Maori had similar costs compared to others. For stage I-III cancers, women living in nonmajor urban areas had a higher chance of incurring costs in follow-up years, and screen detected patients and patients having any services in a private hospital had a decreased probability of receiving any public healthcare services. CONCLUSIONS: Pacific women had higher costs than others, but after adjustment for cancer stage, subtype, and other factors, they had lower costs than others. The early detection and better management of stage I-III breast cancer can lead to better outcome and lower costs in follow-up years.

Tasa de afectación de los márgenes quirúrgicos tras la cirugía conservadora de mama y estimación de los costes directos / Rate of effect of surgical margins after breast conserving surgery and estimation of direct costs

Objetivo: Valoración de la tasa de reintervención en pacientes con márgenes de resección positivos tras cirugía conservadora inicial por cáncer de mama y estimación del coste para el hospital. Métodos: Estudio observacional de la tasa de afectación de los márgenes quirúrgicos de la pieza de resección tras la cirugía conservadora inicial en mujeres con carcinoma de mama invasor durante los años 2018-2019 en el H. U. de Tarragona Joan XXIII (HUTJ23), estableciendo en qué casos fue precisa la realización de una segunda intervención sobre la mama. Se estiman los costes directos añadidos que supone el segundo procedimiento quirúrgico y se compara con el gasto según los pesos establecidos por el Servicio Catalán de Salud según el nivel del hospital y los Grupos Relacionados por el Diagnóstico (GRD) fijados por el Sistema Nacional de Salud.Resultados: Se incluyó a 146 pacientes con diagnóstico de cáncer de mama invasor. Encontramos márgenes positivos tras la cirugía conservadora inicial en el 20,55% de los casos. Se reintervino al 19,17% del total de pacientes, generando las reintervenciones un coste de 129.696,089€, siendo 82.654,34€ para cirugía conservadora (3.757,01€ de media por paciente) y de 47.042,55€ en las mastectomías (6.720,36€ de media por paciente). Conclusiones: La afectación de los márgenes tras cirugía conservadora de la mama es sinónimo de reintervención, lo que supone una serie de costes directos que dependen del tipo de cirurgia y el régimen escogido (ambulatoria u hospitalizada). Es recomendable controlar los factores que inciden en los márgenes afectos para minimizar su impacto. (AU)

Objective: Assessment of the reoperation rate in patients with positive resection margins after initial breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer and estimation of the cost to the hospital. Method: 146 patients with diagnosis of invasive breast cancer were included, who were initially intervened with conservative surgery by the Gynecology and Obstetrics Service of Hospital Universitario de Tarragona Juan XXIII (HUTJ23) during the years 2018 and 2019. We calculated the rate of involvement of the surgical margins of the resection piece after initial conservative surgery, establishing in which cases it was necessary to carry out a second resection, estimating the added direct costs of the second surgical procedure, and comparing them with the costs established by the Catalan Health Service according to the level of the hospital and the Diagnosis-Related Groups (DRG) established by the National Health System. Results: The rate of positive margins after initial conservative surgery was 20.55% and 19.17% patients underwent reoperation, generating a total expense of € 129.696,89, € 82.654,34 in conservative surgeries (€ 3.757,01 on average per patient) and € 47.042,55 in mastectomies (€ 6.720,36 on average per patient).Conclusions: Margin involvement after breast-conserving surgery is synonymous for reoperation, this involves a series of direct costs. It is advisable to control the factors related to affected margins to minimize their impact. (AU)

Costos médicos directos de la atención médica de pacientes con cáncer de mama / Direct medical costs in a cohort of patients with breast cancer

Introducción: el costo económico del tratamiento de cáncer de mama (CM) y el aumento en su incidencia y prevalencia desafía la estabilidad financiera de cualquier sistema de salud. Objetivo: determinar los costos médicos directos (CMD) del tratamiento de CM y los factores asociados a estos costos. Material y métodos: evaluación económica parcial en una cohorte retrospectiva de 160 pacientes con diagnóstico conf irmado de CM. Se consideraron CMD desde la perspectiva del IMSS. Se utilizó análisis de bootstrapping para tratar incertidumbre y el modelo lineal generalizado para identificar factores asociados a costos. Resultados: el costo promedio anual (CPA) del tratamiento de CM fue de $ 251,018 pesos. En estadio 1, $ 116,123; estadio II, $ 242,132; estadio III, $ 287,946, y estadio IV, $ 358,792 pesos. El CPA fue mayor en progresión del CM ($ 380,117 frente a no progresión $ 172,897), y en pacientes que fallecieron durante el seguimiento ($ 357,579) frente a aquellas que sobrevivieron ($ 218,699). Conclusiones: el CPA del tratamiento de CM fue de $ 251,018 pesos. Los CMD aumentan significativamente conforme las pacientes presentan estadios más avanzados de la enfermedad. Los factores asociados al CMD fueron edad, estadios II, III y la progresión del CM.

Background: The economic cost of breast cancer (BC) treatment and the increase in incidence and prevalence challenges the financial stability of any healthcare system. Objective: To determine direct medical costs (DMC) of BC treatment and factors associated with DMC. Material and methods: Partial economic evaluation in a retrospective cohort of 160 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of BC. DMC was considered from the IMSS perspective. Bootstrapping analysis was used to deal with uncertainty and generalized linear model to identify factors associated with DCM Results: The total average annual cost of BC treatment was $251,018 mexican pesos. In clinical stage I was $116,123, stage II $242,132, stage III $287,946, and stage IV $358,792 pesos. In progression disease, DMC were more elevate ($380,117) vs. without progression ($172,897), (p < 0.0001). In patients who died, DMC were $357,579 mexican pesos compared to those who survived ($218,699) (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The average annual cost of CM treatment was $251,018 pesos. DMCs increase significantly as patients present more advanced stages of the disease. Factors associated with costs were age, stages II, III and the progression of BC.

Patient preferences for breast cancer treatments: a discrete choice experiment in France, Ireland, Poland and Spain.

Aim: To understand breast cancer patients' trade-offs when choosing treatments and to identify the most important treatment attributes which drive decisions. Materials & methods: A discrete choice experiment was conducted in France, Ireland, Poland and Spain. Progression-free survival, febrile neutropenia, pain, functional well-being and out-of-pocket payment were the treatment attributes. Results: 371 patients were willing to pay €6896 per year for 1 additional year of progression-free survival, €17,288 per year for perfect functional well-being and €15,138 for one pain-free year. Patients are willing to trade off progression-free survival months for better functional abilities and less pain. Conclusion: Patient preferences should be considered by regulatory agencies, reimbursement bodies, payors and clinicians for best treatment choices for the individuals.

The authors wanted to explore what breast cancer patients want the most from their cancer treatments. For this purpose, their preferences were collected in four European countries via a discrete choice experiment. The study showed that patients prefer treatments that improve their ability to function well in their daily lives and reduce their levels of pain. Patients' preferences for treatment outcomes might differ from those of the treating clinicians or regulators. Hence, these aspects can be discussed with their clinicians to make a joint decision on the choice of treatments.

Patterns of Medical Care Cost by Service Type for Patients With Recurrent and De Novo Advanced Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: There is limited knowledge about the cost patterns of patients who receive a diagnosis of de novo and recurrent advanced cancers in the United States. METHODS: Data on patients who received a diagnosis of de novo stage IV or recurrent breast, colorectal, or lung cancer between 2000 and 2012 from 3 integrated health systems were used to estimate average annual costs for total, ambulatory, inpatient, medication, and other services during (1) 12 months preceding de novo or recurrent diagnosis (preindex) and (2) diagnosis month through 11 months after (postindex), from the payer perspective. Generalized linear regression models estimated costs adjusting for patient and clinical factors. RESULTS: Patients who developed a recurrence <1 year after their initial cancer diagnosis had significantly higher total costs in the preindex period than those with recurrence ≥1 year after initial diagnosis and those with de novo stage IV disease across all cancers (all P < .05). Patients with de novo stage IV breast and colorectal cancer had significantly higher total costs in the postindex period than patients with cancer recurrent in <1 year and ≥1 year (all P < .05), respectively. Patients in de novo stage IV and those with recurrence in ≥1 year experienced significantly higher postindex costs than the preindex period (all P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal distinct cost patterns between patients with de novo stage IV, recurrent <1-year, and recurrent ≥1-year cancer, suggesting unique care trajectories that may influence resource use and planning. Future cost studies among patients with advanced cancer should account for de novo versus recurrent diagnoses and timing of recurrence to obtain estimates that accurately reflect these care pattern complexities.

Assessment of Medical Expenditure for Patients With Breast Cancer in China: Evidence From Current Curative Expenditure by System of Health Accounts 2011.

OBJECTIVES: The incidence and mortality of breast cancer have been increasing in China and bring heavy economic burdens to patients, families, and society. This study aimed to analyze the structure and influencing factors of inpatient expenditures of patients with breast cancer and put forward suggestions for insurance management. METHODS: A multistage stratified random sampling method was used to investigate 379 medical institutions and 7366 pieces of inpatient records of patients with breast cancer in Dalian in 2018. Under the framework of "System of Health Accounts 2011," the current curative expenditure (CCE) and its distribution were calculated. The relationships between hospitalization expenditure and factors were analyzed by multiple stepwise regression and structural equation modeling. RESULTS: The CCE of patients with breast cancer in Dalian in 2018 was ¥273.38 million, accounting for 10.66% of the total expenditure on cancer. The majority of the CCE flowed to large general hospitals. The CCE was concentrated in patients aged 40 to 69 years (23.46%). The hospitalization expenditure correlated positively with length of stay, surgery, and drug expenses (rs = 0.586-0.754, P < .01) and negatively associated with age (rs = -0.074, P < .01). The length of stay mediated the relationship between surgery and hospitalization expenses for patients with breast cancer. The factors that affected the hospitalization expenditure were the drug expenses, surgery, length of stay, insurance status, and institution level. CONCLUSIONS: The cost control for CCE of breast cancer inpatient treatment is crucial in China. Promoting hierarchical diagnosis and treatment, reducing the length of stay, and improving medical insurance depth would be effective measures to reduce the financial burden of patients.