Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant intravaginal brachytherapy in high-intermediate risk endometrial carcinoma

Practical brachytherapy solutions to an age-old quandary

•

Age should not be a limiting factor for brachytherapy in patients with localised cancer or for palliation in metastatic disease.

•

In tumour streams where brachytherapy forms part of the curative management, it should not be omitted in elderly patients who are medically fit for treatment.

•

Treatment decisions should factor in patient preferences, the relative merits of different therapeutic approaches and maintaining minimal impact on quality of life.

Cancer is predominantly a disease of the elderly and as population life expectancy increases, so will the incidence of malignant disease. Elderly patients often have other comorbidities and social complexities, increasing the support required to safely deliver all treatment modalities. Brachytherapy is a relatively simple technique by which radiation therapy can be delivered. It offers dosimetric advantages through a highly conformal dose distribution thereby limiting radiation exposure to normal tissues reducing toxicity. Requiring fewer hospital visits, it also offers practical and logistical advantages to the elderly population and in many cases can be performed without the need for general anaesthesia. In tumour streams where brachytherapy forms part of the curative management, it should not be omitted in elderly patients who are medically fit for treatment. In the palliative setting, brachytherapy often offers an excellent means for achieving either local tumour and/or symptom control and should be actively considered in the therapeutic armamentarium of the oncologist in this context.

The Cost-Effectiveness and Value Proposition of Brachytherapy

Brachytherapy is an effective treatment modality for a wide range of malignancies. However, brachytherapy utilization for both prostate and gynecologic malignancies has significantly declined over the last 20 years in favor of external beam radiation techniques. The cause of this decline is multifactorial, with logistical challenges, lower reimbursement, and inadequate training contributing to the preference of many radiation oncologists to more frequently recommend external beam radiation therapy. While the authors recognize the application of brachytherapy to a wider range of disease presentations among which include breast, skin, head and neck, and connective tissue cancers, in this review, we will review the analyses supporting brachytherapy as a cost-effective component of the management in patients with prostate, cervix, and endometrial cancer.

Impact of different adjuvant radiotherapy modalities on women with early-stage intermediate- to high-risk endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

Vaginal brachytherapy was recommended for patients with intermediate-risk endometrial cancer, however, optimal radiotherapy modalities for intermediate-high- or high-risk patients remains controversial. Previous studies have mainly focused on survival outcomes and have seldom taken cost issues into consideration, especially for high-risk patients. The purpose of this study is to compare the survival outcomes and costs associated with two adjuvant radiotherapy modalities in the management of patients with early-stage, intermediate- to high-risk endometrial cancer.

METHODS

According to ESMO-ESCO-ESTRO criteria, 238 patients with stage I/II, intermediate- to high-risk endometrial cancer who underwent radiotherapy from January 2003 to December 2015 at our institution were reviewed. The vaginal brachytherapy group and external beam radiation therapy combined with the vaginal brachytherapy group were propensity score-matched at a 1:1 ratio. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression model were used.

RESULTS

A total of 361 patients met our inclusion criteria, the median age of the patients was 58 years (range, 28-85). All were diagnosed with stage I-II endometrial cancer (324 with stage I and 37 with stage II; 350 with endometrioid adenocarcinoma; and 10 with mucinous carcinoma). The median follow-up time was 60.5 months (range, 3-177). Among 119 matched pairs, no significant differences were found in overall (10.9% vs 8.4%, P=0.51), locoregional (4.2% vs 1.7%, P=0.45), or distant recurrence rates (6.7% vs 6.7%, P=1.0) between the two groups. There were also no differences in the 5-year overall (94.8% vs 93.9%, P=0.78) or progression-free survival (90.0% vs 84.4%, P=0.23) between the two groups. The rates of acute and late toxicity were significantly higher in the external beam radiation therapy combined with vaginal brachytherapy vs the vaginal brachytherapy group (all P<0.05), except for the acute hematological toxicity rate (17.6% vs 9.2%, P=0.06). External beam radiation therapy combined with vaginal brachytherapy had a higher median cost ($2759 vs $937, P<0.001) and longer median radiotherapy duration (41 days vs 17 days, P<0.001) than vaginal brachytherapy.

CONCLUSION

Vaginal brachytherapy was associated with similar local control and long-term survival outcomes relative to the combination of external beam radiotherapy and vaginal brachytherapy and it also minimizes radiation-related complications, reduces medical costs, and shortens radiotherapy duration. Vaginal brachytherapy may be the optimal radiation modality for patients with early-stage endometrial cancer at intermediate to high risk.