Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review

Views and opinions of the general public about the reimbursement of expensive medicines in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVES

Solidarity-based healthcare systems are being challenged by the incremental costs of new and expensive medicines for cancer and rare diseases. To regulate reimbursement of such drugs, the Dutch government introduced a policy instrument known as the Coverage Lock (CL) in 2015. Little is known about the public opinion regarding such policy instruments and their consequences, i.e., reimbursement of some, but not all, expensive medicines. We aimed to identify the preferences of Dutch citizens regarding the reimbursement of expensive medicines, and to investigate the views of the public on the use of the CL as a healthcare policy instrument and their input for improvement.

METHODS

Web-based survey of a representative sample of 1999 Dutch citizens aged 18 years and older (panel of research company Kantar Public). Potential respondents were approached via e-mail. Several policy measures, real-life cases and statements related to the CL were presented in the survey to respondents. Their responses were analysed by tabulating descriptive statistics (proportions and percentages).

RESULTS

1179 individuals (response rate 59%) filled in the questionnaire. Although a majority considered the CL policy unjustified, they preferred it to the alternative policy measures that were presented. In four real-life case descriptions of patients in need of expensive medicines, respondents most often indicated effectiveness, lack of availability of alternative treatment and improved quality of life due to treatment as reasons for a positive reimbursement decision. An unfavourable cost-benefit ratio was their main reason to be against reimbursement. Some argued that withholding reimbursement was a way of informing manufacturers that extremely high prices are unacceptable.

CONCLUSION

There is public support for patients in need of expensive medicine. Many respondents supported the CL as a reimbursement policy. However, there is a wish to optimize the interpretation of the assessment criteria and the weight these are attributed in decision making about reimbursement of expensive innovative medicine for patients.

Preferences for Palliative and End-of-Life Care: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments

OBJECTIVES

Understanding what matters most to patients and their caregivers is fundamental to delivering high-quality care. This systematic review aimed to characterize and appraise the evidence from discrete choice experiments eliciting preferences for palliative care.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was undertaken for publications up until August 2022. Data were synthesized narratively. Thematic analysis was applied to categorize attributes into groups. Attribute development, frequency, and relative importance were analyzed. Subgroup analyses were conducted to compare outcomes between patient and proxy respondents.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies spanning 11 countries were included; 59% of studies solely considered preferences for patients with cancer. A range of respondent groups were represented including patients (76%) and proxies (caregivers [35%], health providers [12%], and the public [18%]). A total of 117 individual attributes were extracted and thematically grouped into 8 broad categories and 21 subcategories. Clinical outcomes including quality of life, length of life, and pain control were the most frequently reported attributes, whereas attributes relating to psychosocial components were largely absent. Both patients and proxy respondents prioritized pain control over additional survival time. Nevertheless, there were differences between respondent cohorts in the emphasis on other attributes such as access to care, timely information, and low risk of adverse effects (prioritized by patients), as opposed to cost, quality, and delivery of care (prioritized by proxies).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review underscores the vital role of pain control in palliative care; in addition, it shed light on the complexity and relative strength of preferences for various aspects of care from multiple perspectives, which is useful in developing personalized, patient-centered models of care for individuals nearing the end of life.

A Longitudinal Evaluation of the Preferences of Patients With Advanced Cancer for Quality of Life and Survival in Malaysia: A Discrete Choice Experiment

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to quantify the preferences of patients with advanced cancer for quality of life (QoL) outcomes versus survival extension in Malaysia. The secondary aim of this study is to explore the change in preferences over time.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment was developed to include 7 attributes valued in cancer management: physical, psychological and social functioning, pain control, survival, place of death, and cost. Patients were recruited via convenience sampling from 2 Malaysian public hospitals. The survey questionnaire was administered to patients within 6 months of their cancer diagnosis with a follow-up 3 months later. Conditional logit regression was used to estimate the preference weight, relative attribute importance, and willingness to pay.

RESULTS

One hundred valid responses were collected at baseline and 45 at follow-up. Respondents placed higher values on QoL improvements from severe to moderate or mild levels and to achieve home death over survival extension from 6 to 18 months. However, additional improvements (from moderate to mild) in some of the QoL outcomes were not valued as highly as life extension from 12 to 18 months, showing that it was vital for patients to avoid being in "severe" health dysfunction. Improving physical dysfunction from severe to mild yielded 3 times as much value as additional 1-year survival. After 3 months, the respondents' preferences changed significantly, with increased relative attribute importance of physical functioning, pain control, and cost.

CONCLUSIONS

As QoL outcomes are valued more than survival, palliative care should be introduced as early as possible to alleviate suffering related to advanced cancer.

A qualitative study of lived experiences and needs of advanced cancer patients in Malaysia: Gaps and steps forward

PURPOSE

Due to the high burden of cancer-related suffering, it is paramount to understand the gaps in cancer care that lead to suffering. Advanced cancer patients have unmet needs and challenges that differ from those with early-stage cancer due to the rapid disease progression. By exploring advanced cancer patients' lived experiences and needs from the physical, psychological, social, and spiritual aspects, this study aims to identify gaps in the Malaysian health system and propose contextualised measures to improve cancer care.

METHODS

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted to explore advanced cancer patients' lived experiences and needs from the physical, psychological, social, and spiritual aspects. The interviews were then transcribed and coded. Themes were developed from the codes using iterative thematic approach.

RESULTS

The lived experiences and needs of nineteen patients converged into four major themes: disruption to daily lives, psychosocial and spiritual support system, information needs, and financial needs. This study described predominantly how cancer impacted patients' lives and livelihood, how patients coped with their psychological conditions after diagnosis, the need for effective communication and trust in a multicultural society, and how finance affected access to and experience of cancer care.

CONCLUSION

Advanced cancer patients had different needs beyond receiving medical treatments. A concerted effort is required from clinicians, allied health professionals, social workers, support groups, and family members to understand and fulfil these needs.

A review of the cost-effectiveness of genetic testing for germline variants in familial cancer

BACKGROUND

Targeted germline testing is recommended for those with or at risk of breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer. The affordability of genetic sequencing has improved over the past decade, therefore the cost-effectiveness of testing for these cancers is worthy of reassessment.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review economic evaluations on cost-effectiveness of germline testing in breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A search of PubMed and Embase databases for cost-effectiveness studies on germline testing in breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer, published between 1999 and May 2022. Synthesis of methodology, cost-effectiveness, and reporting (CHEERS checklist) was performed.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; in 2021-adjusted US$) for germline testing versus the standard care option in hereditary breast or ovarian cancer (HBOC) across target settings were as follows: (1) population-wide testing: 344-2.5 million/QALY; (2) women with high-risk: dominant = 78,118/QALY, 8,337-59,708/LYG; (3) existing breast or ovarian cancer: 3,012-72,566/QALY, 39,835/LYG; and (4) metastatic breast cancer: 158,630/QALY. Likewise, ICERs of germline testing for colorectal cancer across settings were: (1) population-wide testing: 132,200/QALY, 1.1 million/LYG; (2) people with high-risk: 32,322-76,750/QALY, dominant = 353/LYG; and (3) patients with existing colorectal cancer: dominant = 54,122/QALY, 98,790-6.3 million/LYG. Key areas of underreporting were the inclusion of a health economic analysis plan (100% of HBOC and colorectal studies), engagement of patients and stakeholders (95.4% of HBOC, 100% of colorectal studies) and measurement of outcomes (18.2% HBOC, 38.9% of colorectal studies).

CONCLUSION

Germline testing for HBOC was likely to be cost-effective across most settings, except when used as a co-dependent technology with the PARP inhibitor, olaparib in metastatic breast cancer. In colorectal cancer studies, testing was cost-effective in those with high-risk, but inconclusive in other settings. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the prevalence of tested variants, cost of testing, uptake, and benefits of prophylactic measures. Policy advice on germline testing should emphasize the importance of these factors in their recommendations.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of capecitabine maintenance therapy versus routine follow-up for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer patients after standard treatment from a perspective of Chinese society

BACKGROUND

Capecitabine maintenance therapy is safe and efficacious for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients, but the cost-effectiveness of its long-term use has not been investigated. Here, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of capecitabine maintenance therapy, compared with routine follow-up, in early-stage TNBC patients after standard treatment from a perspective of Chinese society.

METHODS

A three-state Markov model based on the data from the SYSUCC-001 trial was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of capecitabine maintenance therapy in a month cycle over a period of 30-year time horizon. A 5% annual discount rate was set for all costs and benefits. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the model uncertainties. The main outcomes include quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one additional event.

RESULTS

Compared with routine follow-up, 1-year capecitabine maintenance therapy yielded an additional 1.29 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of $3391.70, with an ICER of $2630.53 (95% CI: $1159.81-$5090.12) per QALY gained. The ICER was considerably lower than the recommended willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (i.e., $28,130.00 per QALY). The results were sensitive to the discount rate, drug cost, and treatment cost after relapse. Further, the NNT to prevent one additional relapse case was 29.2 (95% CI: 13.2-196.6), 16.7 (95% CI: 8.4-111.6), and 12.0 (95% CI: 5.7-82.6) at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

One-year capecitabine maintenance therapy for early-stage TNBC after standard treatment, compared with routine follow-up, was found to be highly cost-effective with promising clinical benefits and acceptable increased costs. Real-world studies are warranted to validate our findings in the future.

Economic Perspective of Cancer Care and Its Consequences for Vulnerable Groups

Simple Summary

For cancer patients, many different reasons can cause financial burdens and economic threads. Sociodemographic factors, rural/remote location and income are known determinants for these vulnerable groups. This economic vulnerability is related to the reduced utilization of cancer care and the impact on outcome. Financial burden has been reported in many countries throughout the world and needs to be addressed as part of the sufficient quality of cancer care.

Abstract

Within healthcare systems in all countries, vulnerable groups of patients can be identified and are characterized by the reduced utilization of available healthcare. Many different reasons can be attributed to this observation, summarized as implementation barriers involving acceptance, accessibility, affordability, acceptability and quality of care. For many patients, cancer care is specifically associated with the occurrence of vulnerability due to the complex disease, very different target groups and delivery situations (from prevention to palliative care) as well as cost-intensive care. Sociodemographic factors, such as educational level, rural/remote location and income, are known determinants for these vulnerable groups. However, different forms of financial burdens likely influence this vulnerability in cancer care delivery in a distinct manner. In a narrative review, these socioeconomic challenges are summarized regarding their occurrence and consequences to current cancer care. Overall, besides direct costs such as for treatment, many facets of indirect costs including survivorship costs for the cancer patients and their social environment need to be considered regarding the impact on vulnerability, treatment compliance and abundance. In addition, individual cancer-related financial burden might also affect the society due to the loss of productivity and workforce availability. Healthcare providers are requested to address this vulnerability during the treatment of cancer patients.

Disparities in healthcare expenditures according to economic status in cancer patients undergoing end-of-life care

Backgrounds

A desire for better outcome influences cancer patients’ willingness to pay. Whilst cancer-related costs are known to have a u-shaped distribution, the actual level of healthcare utilized by patients may vary depending on income and ability to pay. This study examined patterns of healthcare expenditures in the last year of life in patients with gastric, colorectal, lung, and liver cancer and analyzed whether differences exist in the level of end-of-life costs for cancer care according to economic status.

Methods

This study is a retrospective cohort study which used data from the Korean National Elderly Sampled Cohort, 2002 to 2015. End-of-life was defined as 1 year before death. Economic status was classified into three categorical variables according to the level of insurance premium (quantiles). The relationship between the dependent and independent variables were analyzed using multiple gamma regression based on the generalized estimated equation (GEE) model.

Results

This study included 3083 cancer patients, in which total healthcare expenditure was highest in the high-income group. End-of-life costs increased the most in the last 3 months of life. Compared to individuals in the ‘middle’ economic status group, those in the ‘high’ economic status group (RR 1.095, 95% CI 1.044–1.149) were likely to spend higher amounts. The percentage of individuals visiting a general hospital was highest in the ‘high’ economic status group, followed by the ‘middle’ and ‘low’ economic status groups.

Conclusion

Healthcare costs for cancer care increased at end-of-life in Korea. Patients of higher economic status tended to spender higher amounts of end-of-life costs for cancer care. Further in-depth studies are needed considering that end-of-life medical costs constitute a large proportion of overall expenditures. This study offers insight by showing that expenditures for cancer care tend to increase noticeably in the last 3 months of life and that differences exist in the amount spent according economic status.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09373-y.