Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiation Therapy Compared With Surgery and Radiofrequency Ablation in Two Patient Cohorts: Metastatic Liver Cancer and Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

AIMS: To compare the cost-effectiveness of stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy (SABR) with radiofrequency ablation and surgery in adult patients with metastatic liver cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two patient cohorts were assessed: liver oligometastases and HCC. For each patient cohort, a decision analytic model was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of interventions over a 5-year horizon. A Markov process was embedded in the decision model to simulate the possible prognosis of cancer. Data on transition probabilities, survival, side-effects, quality of life and costs were obtained from published sources and the SABR Commissioning through Evaluation (CtE) scheme. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with respect to quality-adjusted life-years. The robustness of the results was examined in a sensitivity analysis. Analyses were conducted from a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, which assumed that all three interventions were associated with the same cancer progression rates and mortality rates, SABR was the most cost-effective intervention for both patient cohorts. This conclusion was sensitive to the cancer progression rate, mortality rate and cost of interventions. Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the probability that SABR is cost-effective was 57% and 50% in liver oligometastases and HCC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate a potential for SABR to be cost-effective for patients with liver oligometastases and HCC. This finding supports further investigation in clinical trials directly comparing SABR with surgery and radiofrequency ablation.

Correlation between Ki-67 immunohistochemistry and 18F-fluorothymidine uptake in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging using the radiotracer 18F-Fluorothymidine (FLT) has been proposed as an imaging biomarker of tumour proliferation. If FLT-PET can be established as such it will provide a non-invasive, quantitative measurement of tumour proliferation across the entire tumour. Results from validation studies have so far been conflicting with some studies confirming a good correlation between FLT uptake and Ki-67 score and others presenting negative results. METHODS: Firstly we performed a systematic review of published studies between 1998 and 2011 that explored the correlation between FLT uptake and Ki-67 score and examined possible variations in the methods used. Studies were eligible if they: (a) included patients with cancer, (b) investigated the correlation between Ki-67 measured by immunohistochemistry and FLT uptake measured with PET scanning, and (c) were published as a full paper in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Secondly a meta-analysis of the correlation coefficient values reported from each study was performed. Correlation coefficient (r) values were extracted from each study and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated after applying Fisher's z transformation. For subgroup analysis, studies were classified by the index used to characterise Ki-67 expression (average or maximum expression), the nature of the sample (whole specimen or biopsy) and the cancer type. FINDINGS: Twenty-seven studies were identified as eligible for the meta-analysis. In the studies we examined there were variations in aspects of the methods and reporting. The meta-analysis showed that given an appropriate study design the FLT/Ki-67 correlation is significant and independent of cancer type. Specifically subgroup analysis showed that FLT/Ki-67 correlation was high in studies measuring the Ki-67 average expression regardless of use of surgery or biopsy samples (r=0.70, 95% CI=0.43-0.86, p<0.001). Of the studies that measured Ki-67 maximum expression, only those that used the whole surgical specimen provided a significant r value (r=0.72, 95% CI=0.54-0.84, p<0.001). Studies that used biopsy samples for Ki-67 maximum measurements did not produce a significant r value (r=0.04, 95% CI=-0.18-0.26, p=0.71). In terms of the cancer type subgroup analysis there is sufficient data to support a strong FLT/Ki-67 correlation for brain, lung and breast cancer. No publication bias was detected. INTERPRETATION: This systematic review and meta-analysis highlights the importance of the methods used in validation studies comparing FLT-PET imaging with the biomarker Ki-67. The correlation is significant and independent of cancer type provided a study design that uses Ki-67 average measurements, regardless of nature of sample, or whole surgical samples when measuring Ki-67 maximum expression. Sufficient data to support a strong correlation for brain, lung and breast cancer exist. However, larger, prospective studies with improved study design are warranted to validate these findings for the rest of the cancer types.