Evaluation of trends in the cost of initial cancer treatment

Prevalence, healthcare utilization, and costs of breast cancer in a state Medicaid fee-for-service program

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence, medical services and treatment utilization, and costs associated with breast cancer in a socioeconomically underprivileged population covered by a state Medicaid fee-for-service (FFS) program.

METHODS

We analyzed the West Virginia (WV) Medicaid FFS administrative claims data for women recipients 21-64 years of age enrolled continuously in the program during the calendar year 2005. Breast cancer-related medical services and treatment use and costs were calculated for women recipients with breast cancer. The excess burden of breast cancer was calculated by comparing the all-cause healthcare utilization and costs among women recipients with breast cancer to a matched control group of women recipients without breast cancer. Healthcare costs incurred during the 1-year study period were calculated from the perspective of state Medicaid. Cost estimates in the study excluded out-of-pocket expenses and indirect costs of breast cancer.

RESULTS

In 2005, the prevalence of breast cancer in the WV Medicaid FFS program was 22.7/1000. More than 98% of breast cancer-related medical services utilization occurred in the office setting. Approximately 73% of women recipients with breast cancer had at least one claim for breast cancer treatment, with hormone therapy being the most common (55.1%) treatment. The all-cause healthcare costs were significantly higher for women recipients with breast cancer compared to those without breast cancer ($16,345 vs. $13,027, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with our expectations, breast cancer diagnosis among women recipients in the WV Medicaid FFS program was found to be associated with higher all-cause healthcare use and costs compared to women recipients in the matched control group. The excess cost burden associated with breast cancer could be attributed to higher office visit, emergency room visit, and prescription medication use among recipients with breast cancer.

Cost implications of the rapid adoption of newer technologies for treating prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and laparoscopic or robotic minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) are costlier alternatives to three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and open radical prostatectomy for treating prostate cancer. We assessed temporal trends in their utilization and their impact on national health care spending.

METHODS

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data, we determined treatment patterns for 45,636 men age ≥ 65 years who received definitive surgery or radiation for localized prostate cancer diagnosed from 2002 to 2005. Costs attributable to prostate cancer care were the difference in Medicare payments in the year after versus the year before diagnosis.

RESULTS

Patients received surgery (26%), external RT (38%), or brachytherapy with or without RT (36%). Among surgical patients, MIRP utilization increased substantially (1.5% among 2002 diagnoses v 28.7% among 2005 diagnoses, P < .001). For RT, IMRT utilization increased substantially (28.7% v 81.7%; P < .001) and for men receiving brachytherapy, supplemental IMRT increased significantly (8.5% v 31.1%; P < .001). The mean incremental cost of IMRT versus 3D-CRT was $10,986 (in 2008 dollars); of brachytherapy plus IMRT versus brachytherapy plus 3D-CRT was $10,789; of MIRP versus open RP was $293. Extrapolating these figures to the total US population results in excess spending of $282 million for IMRT, $59 million for brachytherapy plus IMRT, and $4 million for MIRP, compared to less costly alternatives for men diagnosed in 2005.

CONCLUSION

Costlier prostate cancer therapies were rapidly and widely adopted, resulting in additional national spending of more than $350 million among men diagnosed in 2005 and suggesting the need for comparative effectiveness research to weigh their costs against their benefits.

The potential impact of comparative effectiveness research on U.S. health care expenditures

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has the potential to slow health care spending growth by focusing resources on health interventions that provide the most value. In this article, we discuss issues surrounding CER and its implementation and apply these methods to a salient clinical example: treatment of prostate cancer. Physicians have several options for treating patients recently diagnosed with localized disease, including removal of the prostate (radical prostatectomy), treatment with radioactive seeds (brachytherapy), radiation therapy (IMRT), or--if none of these are pursued--active surveillance. Using a commercial health insurance claims database and after adjustment for comorbid conditions, we estimate that the additional cost of treatment with radical prostatectomy is $7,300, while other alternatives are more expensive--$19,000 for brachytherapy and $46,900 for IMRT. However a review of the clinical literature uncovers no evidence that justifies the use of these more expensive approaches. These results imply that if patient management strategies were shifted to those supported by CER-based criteria, an estimated $1.7 to $3.0 billion (2009 present value) could be saved each year.

Cost-effectiveness studies in radiation therapy

The field of radiation therapy has made dramatic technical advances over the past 20 years. 3D conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy and proton beam therapy have all been developed in an attempt to improve the therapeutic ratio: higher cure rates with lower toxicity. Unfortunately, although the costs of radiation therapy are certainly increasing, it is unclear whether its clinical benefit has also improved. Cost-effectiveness analyses are designed to formally evaluate the cost of a treatment relative to an associated change in quality-adjusted survival. As the cost of oncologic care is increasing, it is critically important to assess the cost-effectiveness of radiation therapy. This article will describe the issues surrounding the delivery and cost of radiation therapy, and it will summarize the work that has been done to evaluate the use of cost-effectiveness in radiation oncology.

Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020

BACKGROUND

Current estimates of the costs of cancer care in the United States are based on data from 2003 and earlier. However, incidence, survival, and practice patterns have been changing for the majority of cancers.

METHODS

Cancer prevalence was estimated and projected by phase of care (initial year following diagnosis, continuing, and last year of life) and tumor site for 13 cancers in men and 16 cancers in women through 2020. Cancer prevalence was calculated from cancer incidence and survival models estimated from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program data. Annualized net costs were estimated from recent SEER-Medicare linkage data, which included claims through 2006 among beneficiaries aged 65 years and older with a cancer diagnosis. Control subjects without cancer were identified from a 5% random sample of all Medicare beneficiaries residing in the SEER areas to adjust for expenditures not related to cancer. All cost estimates were adjusted to 2010 dollars. Different scenarios for assumptions about future trends in incidence, survival, and cost were assessed with sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Assuming constant incidence, survival, and cost, we projected 13.8 and 18.1 million cancer survivors in 2010 and 2020, respectively, with associated costs of cancer care of 124.57 and 157.77 billion 2010 US dollars. This 27% increase in medical costs reflects US population changes only. The largest increases were in the continuing phase of care for prostate cancer (42%) and female breast cancer (32%). Projections of current trends in incidence (declining) and survival (increasing) had small effects on 2020 estimates. However, if costs of care increase annually by 2% in the initial and last year of life phases of care, the total cost in 2020 is projected to be $173 billion, which represents a 39% increase from 2010.

CONCLUSIONS

The national cost of cancer care is substantial and expected to increase because of population changes alone. Our findings have implications for policy makers in planning and allocation of resources.

Lung cancer treatment costs, including patient responsibility, by disease stage and treatment modality, 1992 to 2003

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this analysis was to estimate costs for lung cancer care and evaluate trends in the share of treatment costs that are the responsibility of Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data from 1991-2003 for 60,231 patients with lung cancer were used to estimate monthly and patient-liability costs for clinical phases of lung cancer (prediagnosis, staging, initial, continuing, and terminal), stratified by treatment, stage, and non-small- versus small-cell lung cancer. Lung cancer-attributable costs were estimated by subtracting each patient's own prediagnosis costs. Costs were estimated as the sum of Medicare reimbursements (payments from Medicare to the service provider), co-insurance reimbursements, and patient-liability costs (deductibles and "co-payments" that are the patient's responsibility). Costs and patient-liability costs were fit with regression models to compare trends by calendar year, adjusting for age at diagnosis.

RESULTS

The monthly treatment costs for a 72-year-old patient, diagnosed with lung cancer in 2000, in the first 6 months ranged from $2687 (no active treatment) to $9360 (chemo-radiotherapy); costs varied by stage at diagnosis and histologic type. Patient liability represented up to 21.6% of care costs and increased over the period 1992-2003 for most stage and treatment categories, even when care costs decreased or remained unchanged. The greatest monthly patient liability was incurred by chemo-radiotherapy patients, which ranged from $1617 to $2004 per month across cancer stages.

CONCLUSIONS

Costs for lung cancer care are substantial, and Medicare is paying a smaller proportion of the total cost over time.

Longitudinal patterns in survival, comorbidity, healthcare utilization and quality of care among older women following breast cancer diagnosis

OBJECTIVES

To compare longitudinal patterns of health care utilization and quality of care for other health conditions between breast cancer-surviving older women and a matched cohort without breast cancer.

DESIGN

Prospective five-year longitudinal comparison of cases and matched controls.

SUBJECTS

Newly identified breast cancer patients recruited during 1997-1999 from four geographic regions (Los Angeles, CA; Minnesota; North Carolina; and Rhode Island; N = 422) were matched by age, race, baseline comorbidity and zip code location with up to four non-breast-cancer controls (N = 1,656).

OUTCOMES

Survival; numbers of hospitalized days and physician visits; total inpatient and outpatient Medicare payments; guideline monitoring for patients with cardiovascular disease and diabetes, and bone density testing and colorectal cancer screening.

RESULTS

Five-year survival was similar for cases and controls (80% and 82%, respectively; p = 0.18). In the first follow-up year, comorbidity burden and health care utilization were higher for cases (p < 0.01), with most differences diminishing over time. However, the number of physician visits was higher for cases (p < 0.01) in every year, driven partly by more cancer and surgical specialist visits. Cases and controls adhered similarly to recommended bone density testing, and monitoring of cardiovascular disease and diabetes; adherence to recommended colorectal cancer screening was better among cases.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer survivors' health care utilization and disease burden return to pre-diagnosis levels after one year, yet their greater use of outpatient care persists at least five years. Quality of care for other chronic health problems is similar for cases and controls.

How does initial treatment choice affect short-term and long-term costs for clinically localized prostate cancer?

BACKGROUND

Data regarding costs of prostate cancer treatment are scarce. This study investigates how initial treatment choice affects short-term and long-term costs.

METHODS

This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study followed prostate-cancer cases diagnosed in 2000 for 5 years using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Men age≥66 years, in Medicare fee for service, diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer in 2000 while residing in a SEER region, were matched to noncancer controls using age, sex, race, region, comorbidity, and survival. On the basis of treatment received during the first 9 months postdiagnosis, patients were assigned to watchful waiting, radiation, hormonal therapy, hormonal+radiation, and surgery (may have received other treatments). Incremental costs for prostate cancer were the difference in costs for prostate cancer cases versus matched controls. Costs were divided into initial treatment (months -1 to 12), long-term (each 12 months thereafter), and total (months -1 to 60). Sensitivity analyses excluded the last 12 months of life.

RESULTS

A total of 13,769 prostate-cancer cases were matched to 13,769 noncancer controls. Watchful waiting had the lowest initial treatment ($4270) and 5-year total costs ($9130). Initial treatment costs were highest for hormonal+radiation ($17,474) and surgery ($15,197). At $26,896, 5-year total costs were highest for hormonal therapy only followed by hormonal+radiation ($25,097) and surgery ($19,214). After excluding the last 12 months of life, total costs were highest for hormonal+radiation ($23,488) and hormonal therapy ($23,199).

CONCLUSIONS

Patterns of costs vary widely based on initial treatment. These data can inform patients and clinicians considering treatment options and policy makers interested in patterns of costs.

Estimating recurrences prevented from using trastuzumab in HER-2/neu-positive adjuvant breast cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer recurrence is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and cost. Patients with early stage HER2+ tumors are at increased risk of recurrence. The use of trastuzumab for these patients has been shown to reduce recurrences and improve overall survival.

METHODS

A Monte Carlo simulation was conducted based on Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results incidence rates for 2005, United States Census data for 2005, and the results of key trials of the adjuvant use of trastuzumab. Patients included in this analysis had incident, HER2+, stage I to III breast cancer. The number of recurrences that could be prevented with trastuzumab, the cardiac adverse events that might occur, and the associated cost savings were estimated.

RESULTS

Approximately 31,200 women had HER2+ breast cancer in 2005, of whom 7298 would have had a recurrence over the subsequent 5 years despite standard of care adjuvant treatment. If trastuzumab were added to their regimen, 2791 women might have avoided recurrence, and 948 may have had an asymptomatic or symptomatic cardiac adverse event, for a ratio of expected recurrences to cardiac adverse events of 3.2 (95% confidence interval, 1.5-5.9). In economic terms, avoidance of future breast cancer recurrences was associated with lifetime reduction in future direct and indirect costs on the order of $240 million to $1.7 billion.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the simulation results, targeting HER2+ tumors with trastuzumab in the adjuvant setting should prevent a significant number of women from recurrence events, with important outcomes for patients, physicians, payers, and society.

Cancer treatment cost in the United States: has the burden shifted over time?

BACKGROUND

There has not been a comprehensive analysis of how aggregate cancer costs have changed over time. The authors present 1) updated estimates of the prevalence and total cost of cancer for select payers and how these have changed over the past 2 decades; and 2) for each payer, the distribution of payments by type of service over time to assess whether there have been shifts in cancer treatment settings.

METHODS

Pooled data from the 2001 through 2005 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and the 1987 National Medical Care Expenditure Survey were used for the analysis. The authors used an econometric approach to estimate cancer-attributable medical expenditures by payer and type of service.

RESULTS

In 1987, the total medical cost of cancer (in 2007 US dollars) was $24.7 billion. Private payers financed the largest share of the total (42%), followed by Medicare (33%), out of pocket (17%), other public (7%), and Medicaid (1%). Between 1987 and the 2001 to 2005 period, the total medical cost of cancer increased to $48.1 billion. In 2001 to 2005, the shares of cancer costs were: private insurance (50%), Medicare (34%), out of pocket (8%), other public (5%), and Medicaid (3%). The share of total cancer costs that resulted from inpatient admissions fell from 64.4% in 1987 to 27.5% in 2001 to 2005.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors identified 3 trends in the total costs of cancer: 1) the medical costs of cancer have nearly doubled; 2) cancer costs have shifted away from the inpatient setting; and 3) the share of these costs paid for by private insurance and Medicaid have increased.

Linking the Iowa Women's Health Study cohort to Medicare data: linkage results and application to hip fracture

This study linked the Iowa Women's Health Study cohort to Medicare administrative data and assessed the value of using Medicare and survey-based sources to study hip fracture incidence. The authors used Social Security number to combine the Iowa Women's Health Study cohort Medicare enrollment and claims data for 1986-2004. Hip fractures were identified from Medicare and follow-up-mail, survey-based sources. Estimates of hip fracture incidence after age 65 years and postfracture mortality were compared. The authors were able to match to Medicare 99.2% of the 40,978 Iowa Women's Health Study participants who survived to age 65 years. Although both Medicare and survey-based hip fracture incidence showed the expected positive association with age and negative association with body mass index, hip fracture incidence was considerably underestimated by self-report (2.61 per 1,000 person-years of observation vs. 4.20 per 1,000 person-years of observation from Medicare-based estimates). Similarly, 1-year postfracture mortality was significantly underestimated by survey-based measures (1% vs. 14% for Medicare-based estimates). Medicare data are an outstanding source of health care information to supplement for older cohorts that have identifiers such as Social Security numbers. These data are useful for studying clinically unambiguous and high morbidity and mortality conditions. They enable less-biased collection of health data.

Incidence and treatment patterns in hospitalizations for malignant spinal cord compression in the United States, 1998-2006

PURPOSE

To characterize patterns in incidence, management, and costs of malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) hospitalizations in the United States, using population-based data.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, an all-payer healthcare database representative of all U.S. hospitalizations, MSCC-related hospitalizations were identified for the period 1998-2006. Cases were combined with age-adjusted Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results cancer death data to estimate annual incidence. Linear regression characterized trends in patient, treatment, and hospital characteristics, costs, and outcomes. Logistic regression was used to examine inpatient treatment (radiotherapy [RT], surgery, or neither) by hospital characteristics and year, adjusting for confounding.

RESULTS

We identified 15,367 MSCC-related cases, representing 75,876 hospitalizations. Lung cancer (24.9%), prostate cancer (16.2%), and multiple myeloma (11.1%) were the most prevalent underlying cancer diagnoses. The annual incidence of MSCC hospitalization among patients dying of cancer was 3.4%; multiple myeloma (15.0%), Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas (13.9%), and prostate cancer (5.5%) exhibited the highest cancer-specific incidence. Over the study period, inpatient RT for MSCC decreased (odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.81), whereas surgery increased (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.17-1.84). Hospitalization costs for MSCC increased (5.3% per year, p < 0.001). Odds of inpatient RT were greater at teaching hospitals (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.19-1.67), whereas odds of surgery were greater at urban institutions (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.29-2.58).

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, patients dying of cancer have an estimated 3.4% annual incidence of MSCC requiring hospitalization. Inpatient management of MSCC varied over time and by hospital characteristics, with hospitalization costs increasing. Future studies are required to determine the impact of treatment patterns on MSCC outcomes and strategies for reducing MSCC-related costs.

Statin Use and Risk of Prostate Cancer Recurrence in Men Treated With Radiation Therapy

Purpose

There has been growing interest in the potential anticancer activity of statins based on preclinical evidence of their antiproliferative, proapoptotic, and radiosensitizing properties. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether statin use is associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients treated with radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer.

Patients and Methods

In total, 691 men with prostate adenocarcinoma treated with curative-intent RT between 1988 and 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. Of those, 189 patients (27%) were using statins, either during initial consultation or during follow-up. Lipid panels were collected (n = 298) a median of 5 months before RT start. Median follow-up was 50 months after RT.

Results

Statin use was associated with improved freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF; P < .001), freedom from salvage androgen deprivation therapy (FFADT; P = .0011), and relapse-free survival (RFS; P < .001). Improved FFBF for statin users was seen in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (P = .0401, P = .0331, and P = .0034, respectively). The improvement in FFBF with statin use was independent of ADT use or radiation dose. On multivariable analysis, statin use was associated with improved FFBF (P < .001) along with pretreatment prostate-specific antigen ≤ 8.4 (P < .001), stage less than T2b (P = .0111), and Gleason score < 7 (P = .0098). On univariate analysis, pretreatment total cholesterol < 187 (89% v 80%; P = .0494) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) < 110 (96% v 85%; P = .0462) were associated with improved 4-year FFBF.

Conclusion

Statin use was associated with a significant improvement in FFBF, FFADT, and RFS in this cohort of men treated with RT for prostate cancer. The favorable effect of statins may be mediated by direct effect or via the LDL-lowering effect of these medications.

A randomized trial of tailoring and motivational interviewing to promote fruit and vegetable consumption for cancer prevention and control

BACKGROUND

Healthful dietary patterns, including eating fruits and vegetables (F&V) and avoiding obesity, may decrease the risk of cancer and other chronic diseases. In addition to promoting health for the general population, a cancer diagnosis may provide a "teachable moment," facilitating the adoption of more healthful eating habits and leading to lower risk of chronic disease and better overall health.

PURPOSE

This study was designed to test the effectiveness of two health communication interventions in increasing F&V consumption and physical activity in a sample of older adults (average age of 66 years), including both colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors and noncolorectal cancer-affected (N-CRC) individuals.

METHODS

CRC survivors and N-CRC individuals were recruited from a population-based case-control study and randomly assigned to four conditions using a 2 x 2 design. We tested two different methods of communicating and promoting health behavior change alone or in combination: tailored print communication (TPC) and brief telephone-based motivational interviewing (TMI).

RESULTS

A significant increase in F&V consumption was found for the combined intervention group in the entire sample (p < 0.05). When stratified by cancer survivor status, the effect was concentrated in the N-CRC subset (p < 0.01) versus CRC survivors. The combined intervention was also found to be most cost-effective for the N-CRC group, with TPC more cost-effective than TMI. For physical activity, none of the interventions produced statistically significant improvements.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that combining tailoring and motivational interviewing may be an effective and cost-effective method for promoting dietary behavior change among older healthy adults. More research is needed to identify the optimal dose and timing for intervention strategies to promote dietary and physical activity change among both CRC survivors and the general population.

Stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer in patients aged > or =75 years: outcomes after stereotactic radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

The number of patients aged > or =75 years who present with a stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is increasing. Elderly patients often have significant comorbidity and may be unfit for surgery. Furthermore, surgery in the elderly is associated with increased mortality and morbidity. In this study, the authors evaluated the outcomes of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in elderly patients.

METHODS

Since 2003, 203 tumors in 193 patients aged > or =75 years were treated using SRT (118 T1 tumors, 85 T2 tumors). The median patient age was 79 years, 80% of patients were considered medically inoperable, and 20% of patients declined surgery. The median Charlson comorbidity score was 4, and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease Class III or greater) was present in 25% of patients. Risk-adapted SRT schemes were used with the same total dose of 60 grays in 3 fractions (33%), 5 fractions (50%), or 8 fractions (17% of patients), depending on the patient's risk for toxicity.

RESULTS

SRT was well tolerated, and all but 1 patient completed treatment. Survival rates at 1 year and 3 years were 86% and 45%, respectively. Survival was correlated with performance score (P = .001) and pre-SRT lung function (P = .04). The actuarial local control rate at 3 years was 89%. Acute toxicity was uncommon, and late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade > or =3 toxicity was observed in <10% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SRT achieved high local control rates with minimal toxicity in patients aged > or =75 years despite their significant medical comorbidities. These results indicated that more active diagnostic and therapeutic approaches are justified in elderly patients and that SRT should be considered and discussed as a curative treatment alternative.

Impact of the cost of cancer treatment: an internet-based survey

PURPOSE

Despite considerable discussion in the medical literature and lay press regarding the increasing cost of cancer care, there is limited information available on the perceived impact of treatment costs on individual patients and their families.

METHODS

To directly address this issue, patients with cancer who had participated in an Internet-based oncology decision-support program and agreed to receive information concerning potential future surveys were asked via e-mail to complete a questionnaire dealing with treatment-related medical expenses.

RESULTS

Of 39,882 invitations sent to patients with cancers of the breast, colon, lung, and prostate, 1,767 (4.4%) were returned, which included a wide spectrum of disease, demographics, and annual incomes. Since diagnosis, 20% and 4% of patients reported having spent out of pocket more than $10,000 and more than $50,000, respectively, on treatment and medical care. Overall, 19% of patients and 39% of individuals with a yearly income of less than $40,000 reported the financial costs of treating their cancer had caused a "large amount of distress." Furthermore, although overall, 9% of patients stated they had decided "to not have a recommended cancer treatment because it was too expensive," this percentage increased to 25% for individuals with an income of less than $40,000.

CONCLUSION

This survey suggests that a substantial proportion of patients and their families experience considerable distress associated with the cost of cancer care delivery. Furthermore, these costs affect the decision of patients with cancer to receive recommended treatment. This is a particularly serious issue for individuals with a modest annual income.

Economic analysis: randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial of erlotinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The NCIC Clinical Trials Group conducted the BR.21 trial, a randomized placebo-controlled trial of erlotinib (an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor) in patients with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer. This trial accrued patients between August 14, 2001, and January 31, 2003, and found that overall survival and quality of life were improved in the erlotinib arm than in the placebo arm. However, funding restrictions limit access to erlotinib in many countries. We undertook an economic analysis of erlotinib treatment in this trial and explored different molecular and clinical predictors of outcome to determine the cost-effectiveness of treating various populations with erlotinib.

METHODS

Resource utilization was determined from individual patient data in the BR.21 trial database. The trial recruited 731 patients (488 in the erlotinib arm and 243 in the placebo arm). Costs arising from erlotinib treatment, diagnostic tests, outpatient visits, acute hospitalization, adverse events, lung cancer-related concomitant medications, transfusions, and radiation therapy were captured. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated as the ratio of incremental cost (in 2007 Canadian dollars) to incremental effectiveness (life-years gained). In exploratory analyses, we evaluated the benefits of treatment in selected subgroups to determine the impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for erlotinib treatment in the BR.21 trial population was $94,638 per life-year gained (95% confidence interval = $52,359 to $429,148). The major drivers of cost-effectiveness included the magnitude of survival benefit and erlotinib cost. Subgroup analyses revealed that erlotinib may be more cost-effective in never-smokers or patients with high EGFR gene copy number.

CONCLUSION

With an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $94 638 per life-year gained, erlotinib treatment for patients with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer is marginally cost-effective. The use of molecular predictors of benefit for targeted agents may help identify more or less cost-effective subgroups for treatment.

Racial and ethnic variation in health resource use and cost for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the racial and ethnic variation in health resource use (HRU) and direct medical care (DMC) cost in elderly men with prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective case-control study using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare database. Patients with prostate cancer diagnosed between 1995 and 1998 (50 147 men) were identified and followed retrospectively for 1 year before and 5 years after the diagnosis. Phase-specific HRU and DMC costs were compared between racial and ethnic groups using parametric and nonparametric analysis. To compute the incremental cost of prostate cancer, a matched non-cancer control group was extracted from Medicare database. Poisson and general linear models (log-link) were used to identify the association of race and ethnicity with HRU and DMC cost, after controlling for potentially influential clinical and demographic covariates.

RESULTS

The African-American group was more likely to have emergency-room visits (odds ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.12-1.28) and less likely to have outpatient visits (0.96, 0.96-0.97) than whites. However, the Hispanic group was more likely to have inpatient and outpatient visits (odds ratio 0.88, 0.83-0.91; and 0.93, 0.91-0.95) than whites. Adjusted DMC cost showed racial and ethnic variation in all phases except the treatment and terminal phases. Factors associated with DMC cost varied among racial and ethnic groups.

CONCLUSION

The incremental burden of prostate cancer remains significant in the long term. Overall, the cost of prostate cancer care was higher among African-American men than white and Hispanic men. This indicates the need for further research on care-level factors to comprehend the racial and ethnic disparity in HRU and cost.

Patterns of use and risks associated with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents among Medicare patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (erythropoietin and darbepoietin) have been approved to reduce the number of blood transfusions required during chemotherapy; however, concerns about the risks of venous thromboembolism and mortality exist.

METHODS

We identified patients who were aged 65 years or older in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database; who were diagnosed with colon, non-small cell lung, or breast cancer or with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma from January 1, 1991, through December 31, 2002; and who received chemotherapy. The main outcome measures were claims for use of an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent, blood transfusion, venous thromboembolism (ie, deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism), and overall survival. We used multivariable logistic regression models to analyze the association of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent use with clinical and demographic variables. We used time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models to analyze the association of time to receipt of first erythropoiesis-stimulating agent with venous thromboembolism and overall survival. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Among 56,210 patients treated with chemotherapy from 1991 through 2002, 15,346 (27%) received an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent. The proportion of patients receiving erythropoiesis-stimulating agents increased from 4.8% in 1991 to 45.9% in 2002 (P < .001). Use was associated with more recent diagnosis, younger age, urban residence, comorbidities, receipt of radiation therapy, female sex, and metastatic or recurrent cancer. The rate of blood transfusion per year during 1991-2002 remained constant at 22%. Venous thromboembolism developed in 1796 (14.3%) of the 12,522 patients who received erythropoiesis-stimulating agent and 3400 (9.8%) of the 34,820 patients who did not (hazard ratio = 1.93, 95% confidence interval = 1.79 to 2.07). Overall survival was similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent increased rapidly after its approval in 1991, but the blood transfusion rate did not change. Use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents was associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism but not of mortality.

Induced cardiovascular procedural costs and resource consumption patterns after coronary artery calcium screening: results from the EISNER (Early Identification of Subclinical Atherosclerosis by Noninvasive Imaging Research) study

OBJECTIVES

We prospectively evaluated procedural costs and resource consumption patterns in the EISNER (Early Identification of Subclinical Atherosclerosis by Noninvasive Imaging Research) study after coronary calcium (CAC) measurements.

BACKGROUND

Controversy surrounds expansion of cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening to include atherosclerosis imaging as the result of concern whether induced costs will outweigh any benefit.

METHODS

Detailed risk factor and CAC measurements with 4-year follow-up for CVD death or myocardial infarction and procedures were performed. Costs were estimated with the use of Medicare reimbursement rates (discounted and inflation corrected). Cox survival analysis was used to estimate procedures and events.

RESULTS

CAC scores varied widely but were skewed toward low scores with 56.7% of screened subjects having CAC scores<or=10 and only 8.2% having CAC scores>or=400. Noninvasive testing was infrequent and medical costs were low among subjects with low CAC scores, both rising progressively with increasing CAC scores (p<0.001), particularly in the 31 (2.2% of subjects) that had CAC scores>or=1,000. Similarly, invasive coronary angiography rose progressively with increasing scores (p<0.001) but occurred exclusively among subjects first undergoing noninvasive testing and overall, was performed in only 19.4% of subjects with CAC scores>or=1,000.

CONCLUSIONS

CAC scanning is associated with a marked differential in downstream frequency of medical tests and costs, ranging from a very low frequency of testing and invasive procedures among a predominantly large percentage of subjects with low CAC scores, to selectively concentrated testing and procedures among a small number of subjects with CAC scores>400. Thus, CAC scanning appears to foster efficient selective testing patterns among asymptomatic individuals at risk for CVD.

[Costs of initial cancer care and its affecting factors]

OBJECTIVES

The purposes of this study is to estimate the cost of cancer care after its diagnosis and to identify factors that can influence the cost of cancer care.

METHODS

The study subjects were patients with an initial diagnosis one of four selected tumors and had their first two-years of cancer care at a national cancer center. The data were obtained from medical records and patient surveys. We classified cancer care costs into medical and nonmedical costs, and each cost was analyzed for burden type, medical service, and cancer stage according to cancer types. Factors affecting cancer care costs for the initial phase included demographic variables, socioeconomic status and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Cancer care costs for the initial year following diagnosis were higher than the costs for the following successive year after diagnosis. Lung cancer (25,648,000 won) had higher costs than the other three cancer types. Of the total costs, patent burden was more than 50% and medical costs accounted for more than 60%. Inpatient costs accounted for more than 60% of the medical costs for stomach and liver cancer in the initial phase. Care for late-stage cancer was more expensive than care for early-stage cancer. Nonmedical costs were estimated to be between 4,500,000 to 6,000,000 won with expenses for the caregiver being the highest. The factors affecting cancer care costs were treatment type and cancer stage.

CONCLUSIONS

The cancer care costs after diagnosis are substantial and vary by cancer site, cancer stage and treatment type. It is useful for policy makers and researchers to identify tumor-specific medical and nonmedical costs. The effort to reduce cancer costs and early detection for cancer can reduce the burden to society and improve quality of life for the cancer patients.

Effect of rising chemotherapy costs on the cost savings of colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Although colorectal cancer screening is cost-effective, it requires a considerable net investment by governments or insurance companies. If screening was cost saving, governments and insurance companies might be more inclined to invest in colorectal cancer screening programs. We examined whether colorectal cancer screening would become cost saving with the widespread use of the newer, more expensive chemotherapies.

METHODS

We used the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to assess whether widespread use of new chemotherapies would affect the treatment savings of colorectal cancer screening in the general population. We considered three scenarios for chemotherapy use: the past, the present, and the near future. We assumed that survival improved and treatment costs for patients diagnosed with advanced stages of colorectal cancer increased over the scenarios. Screening strategies considered were annual guaiac fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), annual immunochemical FOBT, sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, colonoscopy every 10 years, and the combination of sigmoidoscopy every 5 years and annual guaiac FOBT. Analyses were conducted from the perspective of the health-care system for a cohort of 50-year-old individuals who were at average risk of colorectal cancer and were screened with 100% adherence from age 50 years to age 80 years and followed up until death.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening, the treatment savings from preventing advanced colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer deaths by screening more than doubled with the widespread use of new chemotherapies. The lifetime average treatment savings were larger than the lifetime average screening costs for screening with Hemoccult II, immunochemical FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, and the combination of sigmoidoscopy and Hemoccult II (average savings vs costs per individual in the population: Hemoccult II, $1398 vs $859; immunochemical FOBT, $1756 vs $1565; sigmoidoscopy, $1706 vs $1575; sigmoidoscopy and Hemoccult II $1931 vs $1878). Colonoscopy did not become cost saving, but the total net costs of this strategy decreased from $1317 to $296 per individual in the population.

CONCLUSIONS

With the increase in chemotherapy costs for advanced colorectal cancer, most colorectal cancer screening strategies have become cost saving. As a consequence, screening is a desirable approach not only to reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality but also to control the costs of colorectal cancer treatment.

Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis of cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: evaluation of National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group CO.17 trial

BACKGROUND

The National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group CO.17 study showed that patients with advanced colorectal cancer had improved overall survival when cetuximab, an epidermal growth factor receptor-targeting antibody, was given in addition to best supportive care. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using prospectively collected resource utilization and health utility data for patients in the CO.17 study who received cetuximab plus best supportive care (N = 283) or best supportive care alone (N = 274).

METHODS

Direct medical resource utilization data were collected, including medications, physician visits, toxicity management, blood products, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Mean survival times for the study arms were calculated for the entire population and for the subset of patients with wild-type KRAS tumors over an 18- to 19-month period. All costs were presented in 2007 Canadian dollars. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to determine the robustness of the results. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were determined. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and the incremental cost-utility ratios were estimated by use of a nonparametric bootstrapping method (with 1000 iterations).

RESULTS

For the entire study population, the mean improvement in overall and quality-adjusted survival with cetuximab was 0.12 years and 0.08 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), respectively. The incremental cost with cetuximab compared with best supportive care was $23,969. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $199,742 per life-year gained (95% CI = $125,973 to $652,492 per life-year gained) and the incremental cost-utility ratio was $299,613 per QALY gained (95% CI = $187,440 to $898,201 per QALY gained). For patients with wild-type KRAS tumors, the incremental cost with cetuximab was $33,617 and mean gains in overall and quality-adjusted survival were 0.28 years and 0.18 QALYs, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $120,061 per life-year gained (95% CI = $88,679 to $207,075 per life-year gained) and the incremental cost-utility ratio was $186,761 per QALY gained (95% CI = $130,326 to $334,940 per QALY gained). In a sensitivity analysis, cetuximab cost and patient survival were the only variables that influenced cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of cetuximab over best supportive care alone in unselected advanced colorectal cancer patients is high and sensitive to drug cost. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were lower when the analysis was limited to patients with wild-type KRAS tumors.

Future of cancer incidence in the United States: burdens upon an aging, changing nation

PURPOSE

By 2030, the United States' population will increase to approximately 365 million, including 72 million older adults (age > or = 65 years) and 157 million minority individuals. Although cancer incidence varies by age and race, the impact of demographic changes on cancer incidence has not been fully characterized. We sought to estimate the number of cancer patients diagnosed in the United States through 2030 by age and race.

METHODS

Current demographic-specific cancer incidence rates were calculated using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database. Population projections from the Census Bureau were used to project future cancer incidence through 2030.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2030, the total projected cancer incidence will increase by approximately 45%, from 1.6 million in 2010 to 2.3 million in 2030. This increase is driven by cancer diagnosed in older adults and minorities. A 67% increase in cancer incidence is anticipated for older adults, compared with an 11% increase for younger adults. A 99% increase is anticipated for minorities, compared with a 31% increase for whites. From 2010 to 2030, the percentage of all cancers diagnosed in older adults will increase from 61% to 70%, and the percentage of all cancers diagnosed in minorities will increase from 21% to 28%.

CONCLUSION

Demographic changes in the United States will result in a marked increase in the number of cancer diagnoses over the next 20 years. Continued efforts are needed to improve cancer care for older adults and minorities.

Clinical cancer advances 2008: major research advances in cancer treatment, prevention, and screening--a report from the American Society of Clinical Oncology

A message from ASCO'S president: Nearly 40 years ago, President Richard Nixon signed the National Cancer Act, mobilizing the country's resources to make the "conquest of cancer a national crusade." That declaration led to a major investment in cancer research that has significantly improved cancer prevention, treatment, and survival. As a result, two thirds of people diagnosed with cancer today will live at least 5 years after diagnosis, compared with just half in the 1970s. In addition, there are now more than 12 million cancer survivors in the United States--up from 3 million in 1971. Scientifically, we have never been in a better position to advance cancer treatment. Basic scientific research, fueled in recent years by the tools of molecular biology, has generated unprecedented knowledge of cancer development. We now understand many of the cellular pathways that can lead to cancer. We have learned how to develop drugs that block those pathways; increasingly, we know how to personalize therapy to the unique genetics of the tumor and the patient. Yet in 2008, 1.4 million people in the United States will still be diagnosed with cancer, and more than half a million will die as a result of the disease. Some cancers remain stubbornly resistant to treatment, whereas others cannot be detected until they are in their advanced, less curable stages. Biologically, the cancer cell is notoriously wily; each time we throw an obstacle in its path, it finds an alternate route that must then be blocked. To translate our growing basic science knowledge into better treatments for patients, a new national commitment to cancer research is urgently needed. However, funding for cancer research has stagnated. The budgets of the National Institutes of Health and the National Cancer Institute have failed to keep pace with inflation, declining up to 13% in real terms since 2004. Tighter budgets reduce incentives to support high-risk research that could have the largest payoffs. The most significant clinical research is conducted increasingly overseas. In addition, talented young physicians in the United States, seeing less opportunity in the field of oncology, are choosing other specialties instead. Although greater investment in research is critical, the need for new therapies is only part of the challenge. Far too many people in the United States lack access to the treatments that already exist, leading to unnecessary suffering and death. Uninsured cancer patients are significantly more likely to die than those with insurance, racial disparities in cancer incidence and mortality remain stark, and even insured patients struggle to keep up with the rapidly rising cost of cancer therapies. As this annual American Society of Clinical Oncology report of the major cancer research advances during the last year demonstrates, we are making important progress against cancer. But sound public policies are essential to accelerate that progress. In 2009, we have an opportunity to reinvest in cancer research, and to support policies that will help ensure that every individual in the United States receives potentially life-saving cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment. Sincerely, Richard L. Schilsky, MD President American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Colon cancer treatment costs for Medicare and dually eligible beneficiaries

To estimate the cost attributable to colon cancer treatment 1 year after diagnosis by cancer stage, comorbidity, treatment regimen, and Medicaid eligibility, we extracted an inception cohort of colon cancer patients aged 66 and older diagnosed between 1997 and 2000 from the Michigan Tumor Registry. Patients were matched to non-cancer control subjects in the Medicare Denominator file. We used the difference-in-differences method to estimate costs attributable to cancer, controlling for costs prior to diagnosis. The mean total colon cancer cost per Medicare patient was $29,196. The method can be applied to longitudinal data to estimate long term costs of cancer from inception where incident patients are identified from a tumor registry.

The costs of treating breast cancer in the US: a synthesis of published evidence

Published estimates for the treatment costs of breast cancer vary widely in methodology, perspective, patient populations and time horizon. We systematically summarized and analysed the published literature on per-patient costs of breast cancer, and highlight the perspectives, populations studied, time horizons and future directions for cost studies in breast cancer. This review included 29 US cost-of-illness studies for breast cancer. The estimates of lifetime per-patient costs of breast cancer ranged from $US20 000 to $US100 000. Payer perspectives were popular, while disease stages I and II were emphasized. The costs of initial and terminal therapy were greater than continuing care on a per-unit time basis, but continuing care accounts for the largest share of lifetime cost due to the relatively long survival of breast cancer patients. Costs of different surgeries were relatively similar (breast-conserving surgery vs mastectomy) but, all else equal, significant costs ($US23 000-31 000) were observed for patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy compared with those who did not. Multiple studies confirmed that costs increased with increased stage of disease and costs decreased with increased age of diagnosis. The question remains whether or not lower costs for elderly patients are associated with lower quality of care. The patient, employer and societal perspectives were rarely presented. Experts in the field have recommended the societal perspective for US-based cost-effectiveness analyses. Most lifetime cost estimates were likely an underestimate for today's lifetime cost of treating breast cancer because of changes in practice patterns and improved survival. Further societal-based cost studies that differentiate costs by stage, age and treatment time (initial, continuing and terminal), and include the latest practice patterns would be valuable toward informing US-based cost-effectiveness studies for preventive as well as breast cancer treatment interventions.

Radiotherapy for lung cancer: clinical impact of recent technical advances

Radiation oncology plays an important role in the curative treatment of patients with lung cancer. New technological developments have enabled delivery of higher radiation doses while better sparing surrounding normal tissues, thereby increasing the likelihood of local control without increased toxicity. Multi-modality imaging enables better target definition, improved planning software allows for correct calculation of delivered doses, and tools to verify accurate treatment delivery are now available. A good example of the results of applying these developments is the high local control rates achieved in stage I NSCLC with stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). These advances are rapidly becoming available outside academic institutions, and pulmonologists, surgeons and medical oncologists need to understand and critically assess the potential impact of such developments in the routine care of their patients. Aspects of cost-effectiveness of technical innovations, as well as the level of evidence required before widespread clinical implementation, will be addressed.