51
|
Wu CF, Lairson DR, Dahlstrom KR, Fokom Domgue J, Fu S, Sturgis EM, Chan W. Lifetime health care costs of oropharyngeal cancer for commercially insured patients in the United States. Head Neck 2020; 42:2321-2329. [PMID: 32359131 DOI: 10.1002/hed.26201] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2019] [Accepted: 04/09/2020] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Incidence of oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) is expected to increase but its health care cost is unknown. The purpose for this study was to estimate the phase-specific lifetime health care costs of OPC for commercially insured individuals in the United States. METHODS We used the Truven MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounter Database to identify our patient population. Cox survival analysis was used to estimate patients' monthly survival probabilities. We determined the ratios of the cumulative costs up to a particular survival probability and the costs from that time point to death for all subjects who died before end of the 5-year follow-up period. This relationship was then used to predict phase-specific lifetime health care costs. RESULTS Our study included 2445 patients with OPC. The predicted phase-specific lifetime health care costs attributable to OPC were $88 872, $24 038, and $1537 in the initial, continuous, and terminal phases, respectively, among commercially insured patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chi-Fang Wu
- Department of Management, Policy, and Community Health, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - David R Lairson
- Department of Management, Policy, and Community Health, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Kristina R Dahlstrom
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Joël Fokom Domgue
- Department of Epidemiology and Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, The University of Yaounde, Yaounde, Cameroon
| | - Shuangshuang Fu
- Department of Health Services Research, Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Erich M Sturgis
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Wenyaw Chan
- Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
52
|
Aly A, Johnson C, Doleh Y, Chirikov V, Botteman M, Shenolikar R, Hussain A. The Real-World Lifetime Economic Burden of Urothelial Carcinoma by Stage at Diagnosis. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHWAYS : THE FOUNDATION OF VALUE-BASED CARE 2020; 6:51-60. [PMID: 32832698 PMCID: PMC7433100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is generally diagnosed early and may incur significant lifetime costs. This study estimated, from the payer's perspective, the lifetime costs among patients diagnosed with UC according to stage at diagnosis. METHODS This retrospective analysis of the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database identified patients ≥66 years with newly diagnosed UC from 2004-2013. Patients were followed from UC diagnosis to death or last follow-up to estimate lifetime costs. Costs were allocated to 3 phases: diagnosis (≤3 months after diagnosis), terminal (≤3 months before death), and continuation (months between diagnosis and terminal phases). Survival-adjusted lifetime costs (total and major UC-related) were estimated for patients with UC based on stage at diagnosis (stages 0 through IV) and in a subgroup of patients receiving ≥1 systemic line of chemotherapy (LOC). RESULTS The sample included 15,588 patients: 3,446 stage 0 (8% ≥1 LOC; median [IQR] follow-up in months: 44 [23-71]); 3,902 stage I (12% ≥1 LOC; 33 [15-62]); 4,301 stage II (26% ≥1 LOC; 17 [7-39]); 1,612 stage III (25% ≥1 LOC; 17 [7-42]); and 2,327 stage IV (33% ≥1 LOC; 8 [3-18]). Median age was 78 years and 72% were male. Mean lifetime costs were lowest for stage IV patients (stage 0, $151,626; stage 1, $150,123; stage II, $149,728; stage III, $190,996; stage IV, $117,503). Hospitalizations not involving a cystectomy contributed about half of lifetime costs across all stages. Cystectomy contributed 2-13% of the total lifetime UC costs ($3,356 stage 0; $7,011 stage I; $11,855 stage II; $25,509 stage III; $11,693 stage IV). UC-related office visits contributed 8-15% of lifetime costs ($11,717 stage 0; $14,611 stage I; $19,882 stage II; $21,480 stage III; $17,820 stage IV). CONCLUSION UC continues to be a costly cancer with stage III patients having highest lifetime costs. Hospitalizations drive most of the lifetime costs across all stages; most of these hospitalizations did not involve costs related to cystectomy. Treatment plans requiring shorter and fewer hospitalizations may lessen the economic burden of UC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Arif Hussain
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Baltimore, MD
| |
Collapse
|
53
|
Merollini KMD, Gordon LG, Aitken JF, Kimlin MG. Lifetime Costs of Surviving Cancer-A Queensland Study (COS-Q): Protocol of a Large Healthcare Data Linkage Study. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2020; 17:ijerph17082831. [PMID: 32326074 PMCID: PMC7216287 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17082831] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2020] [Revised: 04/17/2020] [Accepted: 04/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Australia-wide, there are currently more than one million cancer survivors. There are over 32 million world-wide. A trend of increasing cancer incidence, medical innovations and extended survival places growing pressure on healthcare systems to manage the ongoing and late effects of cancer treatment. There are no published studies of the long-term health service use and cost of cancer survivorship on a population basis in Australia. All residents of the state of Queensland, Australia, diagnosed with a first primary malignancy from 1997–2015 formed the cohort of interest. State and national healthcare databases are linked with cancer registry records to capture all health service utilization and healthcare costs for 20 years (or death, if this occurs first), starting from the date of cancer diagnosis, including hospital admissions, emergency presentations, healthcare costing data, Medicare services and pharmaceuticals. Data analyses include regression and economic modeling. We capture the whole journey of health service contact and estimate long-term costs of all cancer patients diagnosed and treated in Queensland by linking routinely collected state and national healthcare data. Our results may improve the understanding of lifetime health effects faced by cancer survivors and estimate related healthcare costs. Research outcomes may inform policy and facilitate future planning for the allocation of healthcare resources according to the burden of disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katharina M. D. Merollini
- Sunshine Coast Health Institute, School of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore, QLD 4558, Australia;
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +61 7 5202 3159
| | - Louisa G. Gordon
- QIMR Berghofer, Medical Research Institute, Herston, QLD 4006, Australia;
- School of Nursing, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, QLD 4059, Australia
- School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD 4006, Australia
| | - Joanne F. Aitken
- Cancer Council Queensland, Fortitude Valley, QLD 4006, Australia;
- Institute for Resilient Regions, University of Southern Queensland, Ipswich, QLD 4305, Australia
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD 4222, Australia
| | - Michael G. Kimlin
- Sunshine Coast Health Institute, School of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore, QLD 4558, Australia;
- School of Biomedical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
54
|
Magee DE, Kulkarni GS. Editorial comment: understanding the cost of bladder preservation in muscle invasive bladder cancer-an evaluation of radical cystectomy versus trimodal therapy costs. Transl Androl Urol 2020; 8:S463-S465. [PMID: 32042617 DOI: 10.21037/tau.2019.10.09] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Diana E Magee
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, University of Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Girish S Kulkarni
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, University of Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
55
|
Furzer J, Tessier L, Hodgson D, Cotton C, Nathan PC, Gupta S, Pechlivanoglou P. Cost-Utility of Early Breast Cancer Surveillance in Survivors of Thoracic Radiation-Treated Adolescent Hodgkin Lymphoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 112:63-70. [PMID: 31070751 PMCID: PMC7825489 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2018] [Revised: 01/24/2019] [Accepted: 03/22/2019] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adolescent women treated for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) are at increased risk of breast cancer (BC). We evaluate the cost-utility of eight high-risk BC surveillance strategies for this population, including the Children's Oncology Group guideline of same-day annual mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) beginning at age 25 years. METHODS A discrete event simulation model was used to simulate the life histories of a cohort of 500 000 25-year-old women treated for HL at age 15 years. We estimated BC incidence and mortality, life expectancy, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), health-care costs, and the relative cost-utility (incremental cost-utility ratio [ICUR]) under the eight assessed surveillance strategies. One-way sensitivity analysis enabled modeling of uncertainty evaluation. A publicly funded health-care payer perspective was adopted. RESULTS Costs across the eight screening strategies ranged from $32 643 to $43 739, whereas QALYs ranged from 24.419 to 24.480. In an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, annual mammography beginning at age 25 years was associated with an ICUR of $43 000/QALY gained, annual MRI beginning at age 25 years with a switch to annual mammography at age 50 years had an ICUR of $148 000/QALY, and annual MRI beginning at age 25 years had an ICUR of $227 222/QALY. Among all assessed surveillance strategies, the differences in life expectancy were small. CONCLUSIONS Current high-risk BC surveillance guidelines do not reflect the most cost-effective strategy in survivors of adolescent HL. The results suggest that groups at high risk of BC may require high-risk surveillance guidelines that reflect their specific risk profile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jill Furzer
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lauren Tessier
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - David Hodgson
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Cecilia Cotton
- Department of Statistics and Actuarial Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
| | - Paul C Nathan
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Paediatric Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sumit Gupta
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Paediatric Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Petros Pechlivanoglou
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
56
|
Mittmann N, Liu N, Cheng SY, Seung SJ, Saxena FE, Look Hong NJ, Earle CC, Cheung MC, Leighl NB, Coburn NG, DeAngelis C, Evans WK. Health system costs for cancer medications and radiation treatment in Ontario for the 4 most common cancers: a retrospective cohort study. CMAJ Open 2020; 8:E191-E198. [PMID: 32184283 PMCID: PMC7082106 DOI: 10.9778/cmajo.20190114] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Previous costing and resource estimates for cancer have not been complete owing to lack of comprehensive data on cancer-related medication and radiation treatment. Our objective was to calculate the mean overall costs per patient of cancer-related medications and radiation, as well as by disease subtype and stage, in the first year after diagnosis for the 4 most prevalent cancers in Ontario. METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study using provincial health administrative databases to identify population health system resources and costs for all patients diagnosed with breast, colorectal, lung or prostate cancer between Jan. 1, 2010, and Dec. 31, 2015 in Ontario. The primary outcome measure was the overall average cost per patient in the 365 days after diagnosis for cancer-related medications and radiation treatment, calculated with the use of 2 novel costing algorithms. We determined the cost by disease, disease subtype and stage as secondary outcomes. RESULTS There were 168 316 Ontarians diagnosed with cancer during the study period, 50 141 with breast cancer, 38 108 with colorectal cancer, 34 809 with lung cancer and 45 258 with prostate cancer. The mean per-patient cost for cancer-related medications was $8167 (95% confidence interval [CI] $8023-$8311), $6568 (95% CI $6446-$6691), $2900 (95% CI $2816-$2984) and $1211 (95% CI $1175-$1247) for breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer, respectively. The corresponding mean radiation treatment costs were $18 529 (95% CI $18 415-$18 643), $15 177 (95% CI $14 899-$15 456), $10 818 (95% CI $10 669-$10 966) and $16 887 (95% CI $16 648-$17 125). In general, stage III and IV cancers were the most expensive stages for both medications and radiation across all 4 disease sites. INTERPRETATION Our work updates previous costing estimates to help understand costs and resources critical to health care system planning in a single-payer system. More refined costing estimates are useful as inputs to allow for more robust health economic modelling and health care system planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Mittmann
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont.
| | - Ning Liu
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Stephanie Y Cheng
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Soo Jin Seung
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Farah E Saxena
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Nicole J Look Hong
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Craig C Earle
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Matthew C Cheung
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Natasha B Leighl
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Natalie G Coburn
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - Carlo DeAngelis
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| | - William K Evans
- Sunnybrook Research Institute (Mittmann, Seung) and Odette Cancer Centre (Look Hong, Earle, Cheung, Coburn, DeAngelis), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Cancer Care Ontario (Mittmann), Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (Mittmann), Ottawa, Ont.; ICES (Liu, Cheng, Saxena, Earle, Cheung, Coburn); Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic (HOPE) Research Centre (Seung); University Health Network (Leighl), Toronto, Ont.; McMaster University (Evans), Hamilton, Ont
| |
Collapse
|
57
|
Overmann KM, Robinson BRH, Eckman MH. Cervical spine evaluation in pediatric trauma: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Am J Emerg Med 2019; 38:2347-2355. [PMID: 31870674 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2019.11.051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2019] [Revised: 11/26/2019] [Accepted: 11/30/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The emergent evaluation of children with suspected traumatic cervical spine injuries (CSI) remains a challenge. Pediatric clinical pathways have been developed to stratify the risk of CSI and guide computed tomography (CT) utilization. The cost-effectiveness of their application has not been evaluated. Our objective was to examine the cost-effectiveness of three common strategies for the evaluation of children with suspected CSI after blunt injury. METHODS We developed a decision analytic model comparing these strategies to estimate clinical outcomes and costs for a hypothetical population of 0-17 year old patients with blunt neck trauma. Strategies included: 1) clinical pathway to stratify risk using NEXUS criteria and determine need for diagnostic testing; 2) screening radiographs as a first diagnostic; and 3) immediate CT scanning for all patients. We measured effectiveness with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs with 2018 U.S. dollars. Costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3% per year. RESULTS The use of the clinical pathway results in a gain of 0.04 QALYs and a cost saving of $2800 compared with immediate CT scanning of all patients. Use of the clinical pathway was less costly and more effective than immediate CT scan as long as the sensitivity of the clinical prediction rule was greater than 87% and when the sensitivity of x-ray was greater than 84%. CONCLUSION A strategy using a clinical pathway to first stratify risk before further diagnostic testing was less costly and more effective than either performing CT scanning or screening cervical radiographs on all patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin M Overmann
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 3230 Eden Ave, Cincinnati, OH, USA; Division of Emergency Medicine, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
| | - Bryce R H Robinson
- Department of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, 325 Ninth Ave, Seattle, WA, USA.
| | - Mark H Eckman
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 3230 Eden Ave, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
58
|
Masucci L, Torres S, Eisen A, Trudeau M, Tyono I, Saunders H, Chan KW, Isaranuwatchai W. Cost-utility analysis of 21-gene assay for node-positive early breast cancer. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2019; 26:307-318. [PMID: 31708649 DOI: 10.3747/co.26.4769] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Background For women with lymph node (ln)-positive, estrogen receptor-positive, and her2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2)-negative breast cancer (bca), current guidelines recommend treatment with both hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. The 21-gene Recurrence Score (rs) assay might be helpful in selecting patients with bca who can be spared chemotherapy when they have 1-3 positive lns and a lower risk of recurrence. In the present study, we performed a cost-utility analysis comparing use of the 21-gene rs assay with current practice from the perspective of a Canadian health care payer. Methods A Markov model was developed to determine costs and quality-adjusted life-years (qalys) over a patient's lifetime. Patient outcomes in both study groups were examined based on published clinical trials. Costs were derived primarily from published Canadian sources. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 1.5% annually, and costs are reported in 2016 Canadian dollars. A probabilistic analysis was used, and the model parameters were varied in a sensitivity analysis. Results The results indicate that use of the 21-gene rs assay was less costly ($432 less) and more effective (0.22 qalys) than current practice. The probabilistic analysis revealed that 70% of the 10,000 simulated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were in the southeast quadrant. The results were sensitive to the probability of a low rs and to the probability of receiving chemotherapy in the low-risk rs category and in current practice. Conclusions Use of the 21-gene rs assay could be a cost-effective strategy for Ontario patients with estrogen receptor-positive, her2-negative early bca and 1-3 positive lns.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Masucci
- Centre for Excellence in Economic Analysis Research, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - S Torres
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - A Eisen
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.,Cancer Care Ontario, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - M Trudeau
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.,Cancer Care Ontario, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - I Tyono
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - H Saunders
- Centre for Excellence in Economic Analysis Research, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - K W Chan
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.,Cancer Care Ontario, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.,Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - W Isaranuwatchai
- Centre for Excellence in Economic Analysis Research, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.,Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.,Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| |
Collapse
|
59
|
Tew M, Clarke P, Thursky K, Dalziel K. Incorporating Future Medical Costs: Impact on Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Cancer Patients. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2019; 37:931-941. [PMID: 30864067 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-019-00790-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The inclusion of future medical costs in cost-effectiveness analyses remains a controversial issue. The impact of capturing future medical costs is likely to be particularly important in patients with cancer where costly lifelong medical care is necessary. The lack of clear, definitive pharmacoeconomic guidelines can limit comparability and has implications for decision making. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to demonstrate the impact of incorporating future medical costs through an applied example using original data from a clinical study evaluating the cost effectiveness of a sepsis intervention in cancer patients. METHODS A decision analytic model was used to capture quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lifetime costs of cancer patients from an Australian healthcare system perspective over a lifetime horizon. The evaluation considered three scenarios: (1) intervention-related costs (no future medical cost), (2) lifetime cancer costs and (3) all future healthcare costs. Inputs to the model included patient-level data from the clinical study, relative risk of death due to sepsis, cancer mortality and future medical costs sourced from published literature. All costs are expressed in 2017 Australian dollars and discounted at 5%. To further assess the impact of future costs on cancer heterogeneity, variation in survival and lifetime costs between cancer types and the implications for cost-effectiveness analysis were explored. RESULTS The inclusion of future medical costs increased incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) resulting in a shift from the intervention being a dominant strategy (cheaper and more effective) to an ICER of $7526/QALY. Across different cancer types, longer life expectancies did not necessarily result in greater lifetime healthcare costs. Incremental costs differed across cancers depending on the respective costs of managing cancer and survivorship, thus resulting in variations in ICERs. CONCLUSIONS There is scope for including costs beyond intervention costs in economic evaluations. The inclusion of future medical costs can result in markedly different cost-effectiveness results, leading to higher ICERs in a cancer population, with possible implications for funding decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle Tew
- Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, VIC, 3053, Australia.
- National Centre for Infections in Cancer, Peter MacCallum Cancer Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
| | - Philip Clarke
- Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, VIC, 3053, Australia
| | - Karin Thursky
- National Centre for Infections in Cancer, Peter MacCallum Cancer Institute, Melbourne, Australia
- National Centre for Antimicrobial Stewardship, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Kim Dalziel
- Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, VIC, 3053, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
60
|
Ondhia U, Conter HJ, Owen S, Zhou A, Nam J, Singh S, Abdulla A, Chu P, Felizzi F, Paracha N, Sangha R. Cost-effectiveness of second-line atezolizumab in Canada for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Med Econ 2019; 22:625-637. [PMID: 30836031 DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2019.1590842] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness in Canada of atezolizumab compared with docetaxel or nivolumab for the treatment of advanced NSCLC after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Materials and methods: A three-state partitioned-survival model was developed. Clinical inputs were obtained from the phase III OAK trial comparing atezolizumab with docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC who progressed after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were extrapolated beyond the trial period using parametric models. A cure model assuming a 1% cure fraction was fitted to the OS data for atezolizumab. Outcomes for nivolumab were informed by a network meta-analysis (NMA) vs atezolizumab. Resource use and costs were informed by clinical expert opinion and published Canadian sources. Utility values were obtained from the OAK trial. The perspective of the analysis was that of the Canadian publicly-funded healthcare system. The base case time horizon was 10 years, and the discount rate was 1.5% annually for both costs and effects. Scenario analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results and all analyses were performed probabilistically. Results: Atezolizumab demonstrated a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain of 0.60 compared with docetaxel at an incremental cost of $85,073, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $142,074/QALY. Atezolizumab dominated nivolumab (regardless of dosing regimen), based on modest differences in both QALYs and costs. Docetaxel was most likely to be cost effective at willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds below $125,000/QALY gained, while atezolizumab was most likely to be cost effective beyond this WTP threshold. In most scenario analyses, the results remained robust to changes in parameters. A reduced time horizon and alternative approaches to the NMA had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness results. Conclusion: Atezolizumab represents a cost-effective therapeutic option in Canada for the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC who progress after first-line platinum doublet chemotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Umang Ondhia
- a Hoffmann-La Roche Limited, Global Access , Mississauga , Canada
| | - H J Conter
- b Division of Oncology , William Osler Health System , Toronto , Canada
- c Division of Medical Oncology, Western University , London , Canada
| | - Scott Owen
- d Department of Oncology, McGill University , Montreal , Canada
| | - Anna Zhou
- e Cornerstone Research Group , Burlington , Canada
| | - Julian Nam
- a Hoffmann-La Roche Limited, Global Access , Mississauga , Canada
| | - Sumeet Singh
- e Cornerstone Research Group , Burlington , Canada
| | - Ahmed Abdulla
- f F. Hoffmann-La Roche Limited , Basel , Switzerland
| | - Paula Chu
- f F. Hoffmann-La Roche Limited , Basel , Switzerland
| | | | - Noman Paracha
- f F. Hoffmann-La Roche Limited , Basel , Switzerland
| | - Randeep Sangha
- g Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute , Edmonton , Canada
| |
Collapse
|
61
|
Seung SJ, Hurry M, Hassan S, Walton RN, Evans WK. Cost-of-illness study for non-small-cell lung cancer using real-world data. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2019; 26:102-107. [PMID: 31043811 DOI: 10.3747/co.26.4555] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Background With recent advances in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) and current fiscal constraints within publicly funded health care systems, understanding the real-world economic effect of lung cancer management has become important. The objective of the present study was to determine the costs and resources used in the management of nsclc cohorts in Ontario. Methods Patients diagnosed between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2015 were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked to provincial administrative databases, capturing resources such as hospitalizations, cancer clinic visits, physician services, and systemic therapies or radiotherapy. A cost-of-illness analysis using a bottom-up approach and the GETCOST macro available at ices determined the overall total and mean costs in 2017 Canadian dollars. Resource utilization results were analyzed according to the total number of encounters per resource, the number of patients using each resource, and the number of encounters per patient. A separate cost-and-resource analysis was conducted for radiotherapy. Results The 24,729 nsclc patients identified included 4542 with stage iii unresectable disease and 10,103 with stage iv nonsquamous disease. The overall total cost for all nsclc patients was $1.9 billion, with inpatient hospitalizations ($635.2 million), cancer clinic visits ($323.7 million), and physician services ($301.4 million) being the top cost contributors. The mean cost per patient was $76,816. The total cost of radiotherapy was $38.5 million. Conclusions Real-world costs for the management of nsclc during the 5-year period examined were substantial, despite the fact that median survival was poor and treatment information was limited.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S J Seung
- hope Research Centre, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON
| | - M Hurry
- AstraZeneca Canada, Mississauga, ON
| | - S Hassan
- hope Research Centre, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
62
|
Shah S, Young HN, Cobran EK. An economic evaluation of conservative management and cryotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer. JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH 2018. [DOI: 10.1111/jphs.12248] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Surbhi Shah
- Division of Pharmaceutical Health Services, Outcomes, and Policy; College of Pharmacy; University of Georgia; Athens GA USA
| | - Henry N. Young
- Division of Pharmaceutical Health Services, Outcomes, and Policy; College of Pharmacy; University of Georgia; Athens GA USA
| | - Ewan K. Cobran
- Division of Pharmaceutical Health Services, Outcomes, and Policy; College of Pharmacy; University of Georgia; Athens GA USA
| |
Collapse
|
63
|
Bates N, Callander E, Lindsay D, Watt K. CancerCostMod: a model of the healthcare expenditure, patient resource use, and patient co-payment costs for Australian cancer patients. HEALTH ECONOMICS REVIEW 2018; 8:28. [PMID: 30382489 PMCID: PMC6742917 DOI: 10.1186/s13561-018-0212-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2018] [Accepted: 10/16/2018] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Although cancer survival in general has improved in Australia over the past 30 years, Indigenous Australians, socioeconomically disadvantaged persons, and people living in remote areas still experience poorer health outcomes. This paper aims to describe the development of CancerCostMod, and to present the healthcare expenditure and patient co-payments for the first 12-months post-diagnosis. The base population is a census of all cancer diagnoses (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) in Queensland, Australia between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2012 (N = 25,553). Each individual record was linked to their Queensland Health Admitted Patient Data Collection, Emergency Department Information System, Medicare Benefits Schedule, and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme records from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2015. Indigenous status was recorded for 87% of participants in our base population. Multiple imputation was used to assign Indigenous status to records where Indigenous status was missing. This base population was then weighted, using a programmed SAS macro (GREGWT) to be representative of the Australian population. We adopted a national healthcare perspective to estimate the cost of cancer for hospital episodes, ED presentations, primary healthcare, and prescription pharmaceuticals. We also adopted an individual perspective, to estimate the primary healthcare and prescription pharmaceutical patient co-payments. Once weighted, our sample represents approximately 123,900 Australians (1.7% Indigenous Australians). The total healthcare system cost of all cancers during the first 12-months post diagnosis was $4.8 billion, [corrected] and patient co-payments costs were $127 million. After adjusting for sex, age at diagnosis, Indigenous status, rurality, socioeconomic status, and broad cancer type, significant differences in costs were observed for population groups of interest within the first year post-diagnosis. This paper provides a more recent national estimate of the cost of cancer, and addresses current research gaps by highlighting the distribution of healthcare and individual costs by Indigenous status, rurality, and socioeconomic status.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Bates
- College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences (CPHMVS), James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
- Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine (AITHM), James Cook University, Townsville, QLD Australia
| | - Emily Callander
- Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine (AITHM), James Cook University, Townsville, QLD Australia
| | - Daniel Lindsay
- College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences (CPHMVS), James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
| | - Kerrianne Watt
- College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences (CPHMVS), James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
64
|
Thein HH, Jembere N, Thavorn K, Chan KKW, Coyte PC, de Oliveira C, Hur C, Earle CC. Estimates and predictors of health care costs of esophageal adenocarcinoma: a population-based cohort study. BMC Cancer 2018; 18:694. [PMID: 29945563 PMCID: PMC6020438 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4620-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2018] [Accepted: 06/20/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) incidence is increasing rapidly. Esophageal cancer has the second lowest 5-year survival rate of people diagnosed with cancer in Canada. Given the poor survival and the potential for further increases in incidence, phase-specific cost estimates constitute an important input for economic evaluation of prevention, screening, and treatment interventions. The study aims to estimate phase-specific net direct medical costs of care attributable to EAC, costs stratified by cancer stage and treatment, and predictors of total net costs of care for EAC. METHODS A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using Ontario Cancer Registry-linked administrative health data from 2003 to 2011. The mean net costs of EAC care per 30 patient-days (2016 CAD) were estimated from the payer perspective using phase of care approach and generalized estimating equations. Predictors of net cost by phase of care were based on a generalized estimating equations model with a logarithmic link and gamma distribution adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors. RESULTS The mean net costs of EAC care per 30 patient-days were $1016 (95% CI, $955-$1078) in the initial phase, $669 (95% CI, $594-$743) in the continuing care phase, and $8678 (95% CI, $8217-$9139) in the terminal phase. Overall, stage IV at diagnosis and surgery plus radiotherapy for EAC incurred the highest cost, particularly in the terminal phase. Strong predictors of higher net costs were receipt of chemotherapy plus radiotherapy, surgery plus chemotherapy, radiotherapy alone, surgery alone, and chemotherapy alone in the initial and continuing care phases, stage III-IV disease and patients diagnosed with EAC later in a calendar year (2007-2011) in the initial and terminal phases, comorbidity in the continuing care phase, and older age at diagnosis (70-74 years), and geographic region in the terminal phase. CONCLUSIONS Costs of care vary by phase of care, stage at diagnosis, and type of treatment for EAC. These cost estimates provide information to guide future resource allocation decisions, and clinical and policy interventions to reduce the burden of EAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hla-Hla Thein
- 0000 0001 2157 2938grid.17063.33Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada ,0000 0000 8849 1617grid.418647.8Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON Canada
| | - Nathaniel Jembere
- 0000 0001 2157 2938grid.17063.33Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada
| | - Kednapa Thavorn
- 0000 0000 9606 5108grid.412687.eOttawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON Canada ,0000 0001 2182 2255grid.28046.38School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON Canada ,0000 0000 8849 1617grid.418647.8Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES uOttawa), Ottawa, ON Canada
| | - Kelvin K. W. Chan
- 0000 0001 2157 2938grid.17063.33Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada ,0000 0000 9743 1587grid.413104.3Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON Canada ,Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), Toronto, ON Canada
| | - Peter C. Coyte
- 0000 0001 2157 2938grid.17063.33Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada
| | - Claire de Oliveira
- 0000 0000 8849 1617grid.418647.8Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON Canada ,Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), Toronto, ON Canada ,0000 0001 2157 2938grid.17063.33Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada ,0000 0000 8793 5925grid.155956.bCentre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON Canada
| | - Chin Hur
- 0000 0004 0386 9924grid.32224.35Gastroenterology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA USA ,000000041936754Xgrid.38142.3cHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA USA
| | - Craig C. Earle
- 0000 0000 8849 1617grid.418647.8Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON Canada ,0000 0001 2157 2938grid.17063.33Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada ,0000 0000 9743 1587grid.413104.3Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON Canada ,Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), Toronto, ON Canada ,0000 0001 1457 1558grid.484022.8Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON Canada
| |
Collapse
|
65
|
Smith A, Howell D, Crouch S, Painter D, Blase J, Wang HI, Hewison A, Bagguley T, Appleton S, Kinsey S, Burton C, Patmore R, Roman E. Cohort Profile: The Haematological Malignancy Research Network (HMRN): a UK population-based patient cohort. Int J Epidemiol 2018; 47:700-700g. [PMID: 29618056 PMCID: PMC6005016 DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyy044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Revised: 02/28/2018] [Accepted: 03/06/2018] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Debra Howell
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Simon Crouch
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Dan Painter
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - John Blase
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Han-I Wang
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Ann Hewison
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | | | - Simon Appleton
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Sally Kinsey
- Paediatric Haematology and Oncology Unit, Leeds General Infirmary
| | - Cathy Burton
- St James's Institute of Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Russell Patmore
- Queens Centre for Oncology, Castle Hill Hospital, Cottingham, UK
| | - Eve Roman
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| |
Collapse
|
66
|
de Oliveira C, Weir S, Rangrej J, Krahn MD, Mittmann N, Hoch JS, Chan KKW, Peacock S. The economic burden of cancer care in Canada: a population-based cost study. CMAJ Open 2018; 6:E1-E10. [PMID: 29301745 PMCID: PMC5878959 DOI: 10.9778/cmajo.20170144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Resource and cost issues are a growing concern in health care. Thus, it is important to have an accurate estimate of the economic burden of care. Previous work has estimated the economic burden of cancer care for Canada; however, there is some concern this estimate is too low. The objective of this analysis was to provide a comprehensive revised estimate of this burden. METHODS We used a case-control prevalence-based approach to estimate direct annual cancer costs from 2005 to 2012. We used patient-level administrative health care data from Ontario to correctly attribute health care costs to cancer. We employed the net cost method (cost difference between patients with cancer and control subjects without cancer) to account for costs directly and indirectly related to cancer and its sequelae. Using average patient-level cost estimates from Ontario, we applied proportions from national health expenditures data to obtain the economic burden of cancer care for Canada. All costs were adjusted to 2015 Canadian dollars. RESULTS Costs of cancer care rose steadily over our analysis period, from $2.9 billion in 2005 to $7.5 billion in 2012, mostly owing to the increase in costs of hospital-based care. Most expenditures for health care services increased over time, with chemotherapy and radiation therapy expenditures accounting for the largest increases over the study period. Our cost estimates were larger than those in the Economic Burden of Illness in Canada 2005-2008 report for every year except 2005 and 2006. INTERPRETATION The economic burden of cancer care in Canada is substantial. Further research is needed to understand how the economic burden of cancer compares to that of other diseases.
Collapse
|
67
|
de Oliveira C, Bremner KE, Liu N, Greenberg ML, Nathan PC, McBride ML, Krahn MD. Costs of cancer care in children and adolescents in Ontario, Canada. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2017; 64. [PMID: 28500732 DOI: 10.1002/pbc.26628] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2016] [Revised: 03/22/2017] [Accepted: 04/11/2017] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer in children and adolescents presents unique issues regarding treatment and survivorship, but few studies have measured economic burden. We estimated health care costs by phase of cancer care, from the public payer perspective, in population-based cohorts. METHODS Children newly diagnosed at ages 0 days-14.9 years and adolescents newly diagnosed at 15-19.9 years, from January 1, 1995 to June 30, 2010, were identified from Ontario cancer registries, and each matched to three noncancer controls. Data were linked with administrative records describing resource use for cancer and other health care. Total and net (patients minus controls) resource-specific costs ($CAD2012) were estimated using generalized estimating equations for four phases of care: prediagnosis (60 days), initial (360 days), continuing (variable), final (360 days). RESULTS Mean ages at diagnosis were 6 years for children (N = 4,606) and 17 years for adolescents (N = 2,443). Mean net prediagnosis phase 60-day costs were $6,177 for children and $1,018 for adolescents. Costs for initial, continuing, and final phases were $138,161, $15,756, and $316,303 per 360 days for children, and $62,919, $7,071, and $242,008 for adolescents. The highest initial phase costs were for leukemia patients ($156,225 per 360 days for children and $171,275 for adolescents). The final phase was the most costly ($316,303 per 360 days for children and $242,008 for adolescents). CONCLUSIONS Costs for children with cancer are much higher than for adolescents and much higher than those reported in adults. Comprehensive population-based long-term estimates of cancer costs are useful for health services planning and cost-effectiveness analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire de Oliveira
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Karen E Bremner
- Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ning Liu
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mark L Greenberg
- Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Pediatrics, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Paul C Nathan
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Pediatrics, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mary L McBride
- Cancer Control Research Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.,School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Murray D Krahn
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
68
|
Hoskins PJ, Gotlieb WH. Missed therapeutic and prevention opportunities in women with BRCA-mutated epithelial ovarian cancer and their families due to low referral rates for genetic counseling and BRCA testing: A review of the literature. CA Cancer J Clin 2017; 67:493-506. [PMID: 28881380 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2017] [Revised: 07/18/2017] [Accepted: 07/19/2017] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Fifteen percent of women with epithelial ovarian cancer have inherited mutations in the BRCA breast cancer susceptibility genes. Knowledge of her BRCA status has value both for the woman and for her family. A therapeutic benefit exists for the woman with cancer, because a new family of oral drugs, the poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, has recently been approved, and these drugs have the greatest efficacy in women who carry the mutation. For her family, there is the potential to prevent ovarian cancer in those carrying the mutation by using risk-reducing surgery. Such surgery significantly reduces the chance of developing this, for the most part, incurable cancer. Despite these potential benefits, referral rates for genetic counseling and subsequent BRCA testing are low, ranging from 10% to 30%, indicating that these therapeutic and prevention opportunities are being missed. The authors have reviewed the relevant available literature. Topics discussed are BRCA and its relation to ovarian cancer, the rates of referral for genetic counseling/BRCA testing, reasons for these low rates, potential strategies to improve on those rates, lack of effectiveness of current screening strategies, the pros and cons of risk-reducing surgery, other prevention options, and the role and value of PARP inhibitors. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:493-506. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul J Hoskins
- Medical Oncologist and Past President, Society of Gynecologic Oncology Canada, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver Center, BC, Canada
| | - Walter H Gotlieb
- Gynecologic Oncologist and President, Society of Gynecologic Oncology Canada, McGill University, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
69
|
Zargar M, McFarlane T, Chan KKW, Wong WWL. Cost-Effectiveness of Nivolumab in Recurrent Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Oncologist 2017; 23:225-233. [PMID: 29021380 DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2017-0277] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2017] [Accepted: 08/22/2017] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Treatment options for patients with platinum-refractory, recurrent, metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (r/m HNSCC) are limited and prognosis is poor. The recent CheckMate 141 clinical trial demonstrated that nivolumab, an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 monoclonal antibody, was efficacious in extending the median overall survival (OS) in this patient population compared with standard therapies. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine whether nivolumab is a cost-effective treatment in this patient population and examined various subgroups to determine for which, if any, the treatment is more cost-effective. MATERIALS AND METHODS We implemented a state transition model for HNSCC with a patient cohort who had tumor progression 6 months after the last dose of platinum-containing chemotherapy and compared the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab with docetaxel. Treatment effect estimates and adverse event rates were obtained from CheckMate 141. Costs, utilities, and other model inputs were gathered from published sources. We used a Canadian perspective, a 5-year time horizon, and a 1.5% discount rate for the analysis. RESULTS Nivolumab extended mean OS by 4 months compared with docetaxel and resulted in fewer treatment-related adverse events, producing an incremental effectiveness of 0.13 quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The incremental cost of treatment with nivolumab was $18,823. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY, nivolumab was not a cost-effective treatment option for r/m HNSCC, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $144,744/QALY. Nivolumab would be cost-effective if its price was reduced by 20%. Our subgroup analysis seemed to indicate that nivolumab might be cost-effective for tumors with expression of programmed death-ligand 1 >5%. CONCLUSION We conclude that although nivolumab offers clinical benefit for the treatment of r/m HNSCC over current regimens, it is not cost-effective based on its list price. We have also established a value-based price estimate for nivolumab to be cost-effective in this patient population. Further study is required to draw a definitive conclusion on biomarkers for cost-effectiveness. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE In health care settings in which cost considerations are a constraint on choice of therapy, patient selection should be carefully considered to maintain efficiency in the system. Until a biomarker for response to therapy is identified for nivolumab, this medication is unlikely to be cost-effective for most patients with recurrent, metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mahdi Zargar
- University of Waterloo School of Pharmacy, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
| | - Thomas McFarlane
- University of Waterloo School of Pharmacy, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kelvin K W Chan
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Canada
| | - William W L Wong
- University of Waterloo School of Pharmacy, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|