Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of Short-Course Radiation Therapy vs Long-Course Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Although both short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy have been practiced in parallel for more than 15 years, no cost-effectiveness analysis comparing these 2 approaches in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer has been published.

Objective

To analyze the cost-effectiveness of short-course radiotherapy vs long-course chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Design, setting, and participants

This economic evaluation used a cost-effectiveness model simulating 10-year outcomes for 1 million hypothetical patients aged 65 years with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with either short-course radiotherapy or long-course chemoradiotherapy, followed by surgery and chemotherapy. Utilities and probabilities from the literature and costs from the Healthcare Bluebook and Medicare fee schedules were used to determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. It was assumed that long-course chemoradiotherapy would result in higher rates of low anterior resection (LAR). To model preference-sensitive care, a 2-way sensitivity analysis was conducted in which the utilities of the no-evidence-of-disease (NED) states with LAR and abdominoperineal resection (APR) were simultaneously varied. The analysis was repeated for patients with distal rectal tumors. Analysis was conducted from January to October 2018.

Exposures

Short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy.

Main outcomes and measures

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

Results

Short-course radiotherapy was the cost-effective strategy compared with long-course chemoradiotherapy (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $133 495 per quality-adjusted life-year). Two-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the cost-effective approach for a given patient depended on the utilities for the NED-LAR and NED-APR states. Assuming that a greater proportion of patients with locally advanced distal tumors undergoing long-course chemoradiotherapy (39%) would proceed to LAR compared with those treated with short-course radiotherapy (19%), long-course chemoradiotherapy was the cost-effective approach (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $61 123 per quality-adjusted life-year).

Conclusions and relevance

Short-course radiotherapy was the cost-effective strategy compared with long-course chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The cost-effectiveness of short-course radiotherapy vs long-course chemoradiotherapy was sensitive to the utilities of the NED-LAR and NED-APR health states, highlighting the importance of care that is sensitive to patient preference. Long-course chemoradiotherapy was the cost-effective approach for patients with distal tumors.

SUBMITTER: Raldow AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6481445 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of Short-Course Radiation Therapy vs Long-Course Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Raldow Ann C AC Chen Aileen B AB Russell Marcia M Lee Percy P PP Hong Theodore S TS Ryan David P DP Cusack James C JC Wo Jennifer Y JY

JAMA network open 20190405 4

<h4>Importance</h4>Although both short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy have been practiced in parallel for more than 15 years, no cost-effectiveness analysis comparing these 2 approaches in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer has been published.<h4>Objective</h4>To analyze the cost-effectiveness of short-course radiotherapy vs long-course chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>Th ...[more]

PMID: 30977859

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceShort-course radiotherapy and total neoadjuvant therapy (SCRT-TNT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) has emerged as a new treatment paradigm for patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. However, the economic implication of this treatment strategy has not been compared with that of conventional long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCCRT) followed by TME with adjuvant chemotherapy.ObjectiveTo perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of SCRT-TNT vs LCCRT in conjunction with TME for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.Design, setting, and participantsA decision analytical model with a 5-year time horizon was constructed for patients with biopsy-proven, newly diagnosed, primary locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma treated with SCRT-TNT or LCCRT. Markov modeling was used to model disease progression and patient survival after treatment in 3-month cycles. Data on probabilities and utilities were extracted from the literature. Costs were evaluated from the Medicare payer's perspective in 2020 US dollars. Sensitivity analyses were performed for key variables. Data were collected from October 3, 2020, to January 20, 2021, and analyzed from November 15, 2020, to April 25, 2021.ExposuresTwo treatment strategies, SCRT-TNT vs LCCRT with adjuvant chemotherapy, were compared.Main outcomes and measuresCost-effectiveness was evaluated using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefits. Effectiveness was defined as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Both costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $50 000/QALY.ResultsDuring the 5-year horizon, the total cost was $41 355 and QALYs were 2.21 for SCRT-TNT; for LCCRT, the total cost was $54 827 and QALYs were 2.12, resulting in a negative incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (-$141 256.77). The net monetary benefit was $69 300 for SCRT-TNT and $51 060 for LCCRT. Sensitivity analyses using willingness to pay at $100 000/QALY and $150 000/QALY demonstrated the same conclusion.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that SCRT-TNT followed by TME incurs lower cost and improved QALYs compared with conventional LCCRT followed by TME and adjuvant chemotherapy. These data offer further rationale to support SCRT-TNT as a novel cost-saving treatment paradigm in the management of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of preoperative short-course radiotherapy (SCRT, 5 × 5 Gy) plus FOLFOX4 versus long-course oxaliplatin and bolus of fluorouracil based preoperative long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCCRT, 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) in the management of cT4 or advanced cT3 rectal cancer (RC), both of which have been reported to achieve similar clinical effect in the NCT00833131 trial.Materials and methodsA Markov decision-analytic model compared SCRT plus chemotherapy and LCCRT, by simulating three health states (disease-free survival (DFS), progressive disease (PD) and death). The primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life months (QALMs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Transition probabilities were based on the NCT00833131 trial. The costs were calculated from a Chinese payers' perspective. Strategies were evaluated with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $2370.47 (3 × GDP) per QALM gained. Sensitivity analysis was performed to model uncertainty in these parameters.ResultsThe overall costs for SCRT plus chemotherapy and LCCRT were $78,937 and $38,140 with effectiveness of 29.92 QALMs and 22.99 QALMs, respectively. SCRT plus chemotherapy increased costs and QALM by $40,797.34 and 6.93 compared to LCCRT, resulting in an ICER of $5884.56/QALM gained. In the DFS state, the whole cost for SCRT plus chemotherapy and LCCRT were $11,490.03 and $10,794.06 with an effectiveness of 21.70 QALMs and 19.65 QALMs, respectively. SCRT plus chemotherapy increased cost and QALM by $695.97 and 2.05 compared to LCCRT, resulting in a ICER of $339.50/QALM gained, which below the WTP. The utility associated with the DFS state was the most influential factor on the cost-effectiveness of SCRT plus chemotherapy. When the cost of PD state below $1920, the ICER of SCRT compared with LCCRT below the WTP.ConclusionCompared with LCCRT, SCRT plus chemotherapy is a more cost-effective strategy for locally advanced resectable RC in the DFS state as well as in the all states when the cost of PD state below $1920.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent standard practice for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) entails a multidisciplinary approach that includes preoperative chemoradiotherapy, followed by total mesorectal excision, and then adjuvant chemotherapy. The latter has been accompanied by low compliance rates and no survival benefit in phase III randomized trials, so the strategy of administering neoadjuvant, rather than adjuvant, chemotherapy has been adapted by many trials, with improvement in pathologic complete response. Induction chemotherapy with oxaliplatin has been shown to have increased efficacy in rectal cancer, while short-course radiation therapy with consolidation chemotherapy increased short-term overall survival rate and decreased toxicity levels, making it cheaper and more convenient than long-course radiation therapy. This led to recognition of total neoadjuvant therapy as a valid treatment approach in many guidelines despite limited available survival data. With the upregulation (PDL-1) expression in rectal tumors after radiotherapy and the increased use of in malignant melanoma, the novel approach of combining immunotherapy with chemotherapy after radiation may have a role in further increasing pCR and improving overall outcomes in rectal cancer.MethodsThe study is an open label single arm multi- center phase II trial. Forty-four recruited LARC patients will receive 5Gy x 5fractions of SCRT, followed by 6 cycles of mFOLFOX-6 plus avelumab, before TME is performed. The hypothesis is that the addition of avelumab to mFOLFOX-6, administered following SCRT, will improve pCR and overall outcomes. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients who achieve a pCR, defined as no viable tumor cells on the excised specimen. Secondary objectives are to evaluate 3-year progression-free survival, tumor response to treatment (tumor regression grades 0 & 1), density of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, correlation of baseline Immunoscore with pCR rates and changes in PD-L1 expression.DiscussionRecent studies show an increase in PD-L1 expression and density of CD8+ TILs after CRT in rectal cancer patients, implying a potential role for combinatory strategies using PD-L1- and programmed-death- 1 inhibiting drugs. We aim through this study to evaluate pCR following SCRT, followed by mFOLFOX-6 with avelumab, and then TME procedure in patients with LARC.Trial registrationTrial Registration Number and Date of Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03503630, April 20, 2018.

Project description:BackgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy and short-course radiotherapy followed by resection has been gaining recognition in the treatment of rectal cancer. Avelumab is a fully human immunoglobulin that binds Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) and prevents the suppression of the cytotoxic T cell immune response. This phase II trial evaluates the safety and pathologic response rate of short-course radiation followed by 6 cycles of mFOLFOX6 with avelumab in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).MethodsThis study is prospective single-arm, multicenter phase II trial adopting Simon's two-stage. Short-course radiation is given over 5 fractions to a total dose of 25 Gy. mFOLFOX6 plus avelumab (10 mg/kg) are given every 2 weeks for 6 cycles. Total mesorectal excision is performed 3-4 weeks after the last cycle of avelumab. Follow up after surgery is done every 3 months to a total of 36 months. Adverse event data collection is recorded at every visit.Results13 out of 44 patients with LARC were enrolled in the first stage of the study (30% from total sample size). All patients met the inclusion criteria and received the full short-course radiation course followed by 6 cycles of mFOLFOX6 plus avelumab. 12 out of the 13 patients completed TME while one patient had progression of disease and was dropped out of the study. The sample consisted of 9 (69%) males and 4 (31%) females with median age of 62 (33-73) years. The first interim analysis revealed that 3 (25%) patients achieved pathologic complete response (pCR) (tumor regression grade, TRG 0) out of 12. While 3 (25%) patients had near pCR with TRG 1. In total, 6 out of 12 patients (50%) had a major pathologic response. All patients were found to be MMR proficient. The protocol regimen was well tolerated with no serious adverse events of grade 4 reported.ConclusionIn patients with LARC, neoadjuvant radiation followed by mFOLFOX6 with avelumab is safe with a promising pathologic response rate. Trial Registration Number and Date of Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03503630, April 20, 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03503630?term=NCT03503630&draw=2&rank=1 .

Project description:BackgroundPreoperative (chemo)radiotherapy has been widely used as an effective treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), leading to a significant reduction in pelvic recurrence rates. Because early administration of intensive chemotherapy for LARC has more advantages than adjuvant chemotherapy, total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has been introduced and evaluated to determine whether it can improve tumor response or treatment outcomes. This study aims to investigate whether short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) followed by intensive chemotherapy improves oncologic outcomes compared with traditional preoperative long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT).MethodsA multicenter randomized phase II trial involving 364 patients with LARC (cT3-4, cN+, or presence of extramural vascular invasion) will be conducted. Patients will be randomly assigned to the experimental or control arm at a ratio of 1:1. Participants in the experimental arm will receive SCRT (25 Gy in 5 fractions, daily) followed by four cycles of FOLFOX (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and folinic acid) as a neoadjuvant treatment, and those in the control arm will receive conventional radiotherapy (45-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions, 5 times a week) concurrently with capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil. As a mandatory surgical procedure, total mesorectal excision will be performed 2-5 weeks from the last cycle of chemotherapy in the experimental arm and 6-8 weeks after the last day of radiotherapy in the control arm. The primary endpoint is 3-year disease-free survival, and the secondary endpoints are tumor response, overall survival, toxicities, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness.DiscussionThis is the first Korean randomized controlled study comparing SCRT-based TNT with traditional preoperative LC-CRT for LARC. The involvement of experienced colorectal surgeons ensures high-quality surgical resection. SCRT followed by FOLFOX chemotherapy is expected to improve disease-free survival compared with CRT, with potential advantages in tumor response, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness.Trial registrationThis trial is registered at Clinical Research Information under the identifier Service KCT0004874 on April 02, 2020, and at Clinicaltrial.gov under the identifier NCT05673772 on January 06, 2023.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of Short-Course Radiation Therapy vs Long-Course Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of Short-Course Radiation Therapy vs Long-Course Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets