Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Radiation Therapy Versus Transoral Robotic Surgery for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of PET-CT Surveillance After Treatment of Human Papillomavirus-Positive Oropharyngeal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of surveillance imaging with PET/CT scan among patients with human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

STUDY DESIGN

Cost-effectiveness analysis.

SETTING

Oncologic care centers in the United States with head and neck oncologic surgeons and physicians.

METHODS

We compared the cost-effectiveness of 2 posttreatment surveillance strategies: clinical surveillance with the addition of PET/CT scan versus clinical surveillance alone in human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma patients. We constructed a Markov decision model which was analyzed from a third-party payer's perspective using 1-year Markov cycles and a 30-year time horizon. Values for transition probabilities, costs, health care utilities, and their studied ranges were derived from the literature.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for PET/CT with clinical surveillance versus clinical surveillance alone was $89,850 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Flexible fiberoptic scope exams during clinical surveillance would have to be over 51% sensitive or PET/CT scan cost would have to exceed $1678 for clinical surveillance alone to be more cost-effective. The willingness-to-pay threshold at which imaging surveillance was equally cost-effective to clinical surveillance was approximately $80,000/QALY.

CONCLUSION

Despite lower recurrence rates of human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer, a single PET/CT scan within 6 months after primary treatment remains a cost-effective tool for routine surveillance when its cost does not exceed $1678. The cost-effectiveness of this strategy is also dependent on the clinical surveillance sensitivity (flexible fiberoptic pharyngoscopy), and willingness-to-pay thresholds which vary by country.

Treatment of supraglottic squamous cell carcinoma with advanced technologies: observational prospective evaluation of oncological outcomes, functional outcomes, quality of life and cost-effectiveness (SUPRA-QoL)

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, therapeutic options in head and neck supraglottic squamous cell carcinoma have constantly evolved. The classical total laryngectomy has been partially replaced by alternative organ- and function-sparing techniques with the same prognosis but less morbidity, such as Radiotherapy, Transoral Laser Microsurgery (TLM) and Trans-Oral Robotic Surgery (TORS). Up to now, a prospective comparison of these innovant techniques has not been conducted.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will conduct an original international multicentric prospective nonrandomized clinical trial to compare the efficacy between these treatments (Arm 1: Radiotherapy ± chemotherapy; Arm 2: TLM and Arm 3: TORS) with 4 classes of outcomes: quality of life (QoL), oncological outcomes, functional outcomes and economic resources. The population will include cT1-T2 /cN0-N1/M0 supraglottic squamous cell carcinoma. The primary outcome is a Clinical Dysphagia QoL evaluation assessed by the MD Anderson Dysphagia questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include others QoL evaluation, oncological and functional measures and cost parameters. The sample size needs to reach 36 patients per arm (total 108).

DISCUSSION

In the current literature, no prospective head-to-head trials are available to compare objectively these different treatments. With the increase of highly efficient treatments and the increase of oncological survival, it is imperative also to develop management strategies that optimize QoL and functional results. We will conduct this innovate prospective trial in order to obtain objective data in these two main issues.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05611515 posted on 10/11/2022 (clinicaltrial.fgov).

Transoral robotic surgery with neck dissection versus nonsurgical treatment in stage I and II human papillomavirus-negative oropharyngeal cancer

Background

Surgery + adjuvant therapy was shown to have improved overall survival (OS) versus nonsurgical treatment in T1‐T2N1‐N2b human papillomavirus (HPV)‐negative oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Our objective was to compare OS in transoral robotic surgery (TORS) with neck dissection versus nonsurgical treatment for T1‐T2N0 HPV‐negative OPC.

Methods

Patients with T1‐T2N0 HPV‐negative OPC were identified in the National Cancer Database. OS was compared between groups: (1) TORS with neck dissection +/− adjuvant therapy, (2) primary radiotherapy (>60 Gy) +/− chemotherapy using Kaplan–Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

There were 665 (78.4%) patients treated nonsurgically and 183 (21.6%) patients in the TORS group. Adjusting for age, comorbidity score, facility type, tumor subsite, and tumor stage, primary nonsurgical treatment was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio: 1.90, 95% CI: 1.34–2.69).

Conclusion

For T1‐T2N0 HPV‐negative OPC, TORS with neck dissection may be associated with a survival benefit over nonsurgical treatment.

More work is needed on cost-utility analyses of robotic-assisted surgery

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively analyze the cost-utility of robotic surgery in clinical practice and to investigate the reporting and methodological quality of the related evidence.

METHODS

Data on cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of robotic surgery were collected in seven electronic databases from the inception to July 2021. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the CHEERs and QHES checklists. A systematic review was performed with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as the outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Thirty-one CUAs of robotic surgery were eligible. Overall, the identified CUAs were fair to high quality, and 63% of the CUAs ranked the cost-utility of robotic surgery as "favored," 32% categorized as "reject," and the remaining 5% ranked as "unclear." Although a high heterogeneity was present in terms of the study design among the included CUAs, most studies (81.25%) consistently found that robotic surgery was more cost-utility than open surgery for prostatectomy (ICER: $6905.31/QALY to $26240.75/QALY; time horizon: 10 years or lifetime), colectomy (dominated by robotic surgery; time horizon: 1 year), knee arthroplasty (ICER: $1134.22/QALY to $1232.27/QALY; time horizon: lifetime), gastrectomy (dominated by robotic surgery; time horizon: 1 year), spine surgery (ICER: $17707.27/QALY; time horizon: 1 year), and cystectomy (ICER: $3154.46/QALY; time horizon: 3 months). However, inconsistent evidence was found for the cost-utility of robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery and (chemo)radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Fair or high-quality evidence indicated that robotic surgery is more cost-utility than open surgery, while it remains inconclusive whether robotic surgery is more cost-utility than laparoscopic surgery and (chemo)radiotherapy. Thus, an additional evaluation is required.

Cost-utility of two minimally-invasive surgical techniques for operable oropharyngeal cancer: transoral robotic surgery versus transoral laser microsurgery

BACKGROUND

In the past few decades, a re-evaluation of treatment paradigms of head and neck cancers with a desire to spare patients the treatment-related toxicities of open surgery, has led to the development of new minimally invasive surgical techniques to improve outcomes. Besides Transoral Laser Microsurgery (TLM), a new robotic surgical technique namely Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) emerged for the first time as one of the two most prominent and widely used minimally invasive surgical approaches particularly for the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer, a sub-entity of head and neck cancers. Recent population-level data suggest equivalent tumor control, but different total costs, and need for adjuvant chemoradiation. A comparative analysis of these two techniques is therefore warranted from the cost-utility (C/U) point of view.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis for comparing TORS and TLM was performed using a decision-analytical model. The analyses adopted the perspective of a Swiss hospital. Two tertiary referral centers in Lausanne and Zurich provided data for model quantificantion.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis TLM dominates TORS. This advantage remains robust, even if the costs for TORS reduce by up to 25%. TORS begins to dominate TLM, if less than 59,7% patients require adjuvant treatment, whereby in an interval between 55 and 62% cost effectiveness of TORS is sensitive to the prescription of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT). Exceeding 29% of TLM patients requiring a revision of surgical margins renders TORS more cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

Non-robotic endoscopic surgery (TLM) is more cost-effective than robotic endoscopic surgery (TORS) for the treatment of oropharyngeal cancers. However, this advantage is sensitive to various parameters, i.e.to the number of re-operations and adjuvant treatment.

Preclinical implementation of a steerable, Da Vinci Xi® compatible CO2 -laser fibre carrier for transoral robotic surgery (TORS): A cadaveric feasibility study

INTRODUCTION

Monopolar electrocautery is the most common dissection and coagulation tool during transoral robotic surgery (TORS) but causes significant collateral tissue damage as opposed to CO₂ laser. We aimed at combining both modalities in one robotic instrument arm.

METHODS

We developed a steerable CO₂ -laser fibre carrier serving as an add-on to the existing Endowrist® monopolar spatula of the Da Vinci Xi. Feasibility and safety were assessed in a preclinical setting.

RESULTS

One radical tonsillectomy with monopolar cautery and three with the instrument prototype were performed in two cadavers by two surgeons. No serious prototype-related intra-operative difficulties were observed. Safe and efficient switching between energy sources proved possible in all simulated intra-operative bleeding events. Prototype use allowed for the identification of the majority of key anatomical structures and was scored favourably on NASA-TLX questionnaires.

DISCUSSION

The reported prototype successfully combines the advantages of CO₂ -laser with the advantages of TORS.

Therapeutic strategies: Surgery for human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal carcinoma

Treatment of oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) has undergone considerable evolution since the discovery of human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated OPC. It is widely understood that HPV OPC affects a younger population and standard treatment offers improved oncologic outcomes compared with non-HPV OPC but can cause significant toxicities and long-term side effects. Surgery for treatment de-escalation is an active area of research. The purpose of this review is to explore surgery as it relates to the treatment of HPV OPC with a focus on the evolution of treatment, rationale for surgery, surgical techniques, outcomes, and the role of surgery in de-escalation of treatment.

Radiation Treatment Deintensification for HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer

Human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer (HPV-OPC) is a distinct clinical entity with a favorable prognosis compared with non-HPV-OPC. Surgery and radiotherapy (RT) result in adverse effects, and negative quality of life or functional outcomes, which impact a significant proportion of HPV-OPC survivors. Ongoing studies aim to reduce these negative treatment effects while maintaining high cure rates through deintensified therapy typically use either a primary surgical or RT approach. A single-day curative surgery will remain relevant for many patients with early-stage disease. However, the average patient with HPV-OPC will have indications for adjuvant therapy. A primary RT approach to deintensified therapy has more available data from patients on prospective multi-institutional trials, provides broader patient selection, and may be more cost-effective. Anticipated results from an active phase II/III NCTN trial will help guide the standard of care using primary RT. Next generation trials will help further refine patient selection and/or radical deintensification (30-50 Gy).

Economic evaluations comparing Tran-oral robotic surgery and radiotherapy in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Trans-oral robotic surgery (TORS) and primary radiotherapy are the two modalities used to treat early T stage oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma(OPSCC). Prior literature including a recent randomized controlled trial have not shown the superiority of one modality over the other. When the modalities have similar outcomes, cost-effectiveness have an important role in deciding on the appropriate treatment. There are economic evaluations comparing the two modality with contradicting conclusions. The purpose of this review is to synthesise the evidence.

METHODS

This is a systematic review of economic evaluations on the treatment modalities for OPSCC, namely TORS versus radiotherapy. The main outcome measures were the Cost-utility results reported as the effectiveness and costs separately and as part of the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio.

RESULTS

Literature search identified five articles reporting cost-utility analysis, eligible for the review. A strategy is considered to be dominant when the effectiveness achieved was more at a lower cost, compared to the comparator. At the willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of 50,000 to 100,000 USD per Quality Adjusted Life-Year (QALY), three studies showed dominance of strategies in the base case analysis (TORS in two and Primary Chemoradiotherapy in one). Two of the articles studied node negative patients, one of them favored TORS. Three articles had node positive patients and two of them favored TORS and one favored chemoradiotherapy in the base case analysis. On sensitivity analysis, adjuvant treatment was found to be the detrimental factor affecting the cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

TORS can be considered a cost-effective strategy in early T stage OPSCC, if the addition of adjuvant therapy involving radiotherapy can be avoided. Literature have shown that around 70% of the early cancers would require adjuvant treatment. This implies the importance of case selection while considering TORS as the initial treatment modality.

Robotic and Endoscopic Approaches to Head and Neck Surgery

Technological developments have disrupted the practice of medicine throughout history. Endoscopic and robotic techniques in head and neck surgery have emerged over the past half-century and have been incrementally adapted to expanding indications within otolaryngology. Robotic and endoscopic surgery have an established role in treatment of oropharyngeal and laryngeal cancers, reducing surgical morbidity and improving survival relative to traditional open approaches. Surgical treatment of human papillomavirus-mediated oropharyngeal cancer via transoral robotic surgery offers equivalent oncologic and functional outcomes relative to radiotherapy. Newer iterations of single-port robotic systems continue to expand the scope of robotics in head and neck surgery.

[Functional outcomes after surgical treatment of oropharyngeal carcinomas]

INTRODUCTION

The primary goal of surgical resection of oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPSCC) is an R0 resection. The extension of the primary tumor is decisive for selection of access route, which should be as circumscribed as possible but as radical as necessary. To date, there are no prospective comparative studies that compared functional outcome in terms of surgical access route.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A selective literature search was carried out for the period from 01/01/2000 to 12/31/2019 to assess the functional result after different surgical approaches in the treatment of OPSCC. The search strategy aimed to identify publications that investigated the functional result of transoral approaches, robot-assisted transoral resections (TORS), and surgical resection using pharyngotomies or transmandibular approaches.

RESULTS

Various measures were identified which enable subjective and objective assessment of swallowing and speaking restrictions. For all surgical access routes, studies were identified that examined the functional aspects of the respective access, but there are no direct comparisons between the individual approaches.

CONCLUSION

There are various surgical approaches available for resection of OPSCC, each of which has been examined in various studies with regard to its oncological and functional results.

Acceptance and adoption of transoral robotic surgery in Germany

PURPOSE

Since its introduction over a decade ago, the use of robotic surgery (RS) in head and neck surgery has widely spread around the globe, with very differential adoption of this novel surgical technique in different parts of the world. In this study, we analyze the acceptance and adoption of robotic surgery in the head and neck in Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis using a questionnaire evaluating the acceptance and adoption of RS was performed. Questionnaires were distributed to all chairmen /-women of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery Departments in Germany.

RESULTS

A total of 107 respondents completed the questionnaire (65.2%). At university hospitals, 71.4% of the respondents indicated that a robotic system was available, and 21.4% responded that robotic surgery was performed at their institution; 22.7% and 0.04%, respectively, at non-university hospitals. The overall adoption rate was 0.8%. The most common cases performed were TORS resection in the oropharynx. Main reasons for not adopting this technique were costs, lack of interest and available co-operations.

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence of the extent of adoption of TORS in Germany; main perceived barriers to adoption are costs with lack of cost-covering reimbursement and insufficient co-operations with other disciplines as well as hospital administration resulting in a very low adoption rate of this technique over the past decade. Results from this study may assist in decision-making processes on adopting this technique in the future.

Cost Considerations for Robotic Surgery

Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) is a rapidly growing diagnostic and therapeutic modality in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, having already made a large impact in the short time since its inception. Cost-effectiveness analysis is complex, and a thorough cost-effectiveness inquiry should analyze not only financial consequences but also impact on the health state of the patient. The cost-effectiveness of TORS is still under scrutiny, but the early data suggest that TORS is a cost-effective method compared with other available options when used in appropriately selected patients.

Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology, Part XI: Modeling and Analysis to Support Decisions

OBJECTIVE

To provide a resource to educate clinical decision makers about the analyses and models that can be employed to support data-driven choices.

DATA SOURCES

Published studies and literature regarding decision analysis, decision trees, and models used to support clinical decisions.

REVIEW METHODS

Decision models provide insights into the evidence and its implications for those who make choices about clinical care and resource allocation. Decision models are designed to further our understanding and allow exploration of the common problems that we face, with parameters derived from the best available evidence. Analysis of these models demonstrates critical insights and uncertainties surrounding key problems via a readily interpretable yet quantitative format. This 11th installment of the Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology series thus provides a step-by-step introduction to decision models, their typical framework, and favored approaches to inform data-driven practice for patient-level decisions, as well as comparative assessments of proposed health interventions for larger populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Information to support decisions may arise from tools such as decision trees, Markov models, microsimulation models, and dynamic transmission models. These data can help guide choices about competing or alternative approaches to health care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Methods have been developed to support decisions based on data. Understanding the related techniques may help promote an evidence-based approach to clinical management and policy.

Transoral robotic surgery for the benefit of patients with head and neck cancer of unknown primary: our experience at St George's University Hospital, London

INTRODUCTION

Head and neck carcinoma of unknown primary represents 1-5% of all head and neck cancers and presents a diagnostic and therapeutic dilemma. In approximately 40% of cases, a primary tumour location remains unknown despite investigation. With advancements in our understanding of the role of high-risk human papilloma virus in head and neck cancer, transoral robotic surgery presents an option for diagnosis and therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective case series from a single centre. Case notes were reviewed for 28 patients who had transoral robotic surgery for head and neck carcinoma of unknown primary between May 2015 and July 2019.

RESULTS

Transoral robotic surgery identified an oropharyngeal primary tumour in 19 of 28 (67.8%) patients. All oropharyngeal primaries were p16 positive. The base of tongue identification rate was 63.2%. Median length of inpatient stay postoperatively was 1.0 day. Normal oral intake resumed within 48 hours in 96% (27/28) of patients. Three patients (10.3%) suffered minor postoperative bleeds that were all managed conservatively.

DISCUSSION

The base of tongue primary identification rate (63.2%) in this series is consistent with that previously reported (43-63%; 95% confidence interval). Primary tumour identification rate if a patient is p16 positive is 86.3% (19/22), with 100% of these being oropharyngeal. We suggest future investigation into p16 status as a means of stratifying patients with head and neck carcinoma of unknown primary for transoral robotic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Transoral robotic base of tongue mucosectomy (or lingual tonsillectomy) is a promising technique that offers a high yield of positive identification for the primary tumour. It is well tolerated with minimal associated morbidity. Our findings are comparable with those in the current literature.

Comparative cost of transoral robotic surgery and radiotherapy (IMRT) in early stage tonsil cancer

PURPOSE

To compare treatment costs and cost-effectiveness for transoral robotic surgery (TORS) and definitive intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in managing early stage tonsil cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Direct treatment costs for surgery and IMRT were calculated from SEER-Medicare data for a cohort with clinically early stage (cT1/2N0) p16+ tonsillar squamous cell carcinoma from Kaiser Permanente Southern California Health Plan between 2012 and 2017. A Markov decision tree model with a 5-year time horizon was then applied to the cohort which incorporated costs associated with treatment, surveillance, and recurrence.

RESULTS

IMRT cost up to $19,000 more (35%) than TORS in direct treatment costs. When input into the Markov model, TORS dominated IMRT with lower cost and better effectiveness over a range of values.

CONCLUSION

TORS is a more cost-effective treatment method than IMRT in early stage (cT1/2N0) tonsil cancer.

Transoral robotic surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx in a primarily human papillomavirus-negative patient population

PURPOSE

Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) is one of the main treatment options for non-locally advanced primary oropharyngeal cancer in the United States. However, its use is more limited in countries with a low incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV), such as Spain, in patients with advanced disease, and as salvage surgery. To shed light on the use and potential benefit of TORS in Spanish patients, we analyzed the functional and oncologic outcomes of TORS as both primary and salvage surgery in a primarily HPV-negative population which is representative of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) patients in Spain.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on OPSCC patients treated with TORS at our center between February 2017 and February 2019.

RESULTS

Fifty-four OPSCC patients were included; 79.6% were males and 80.5% were HPV negative. Median age was 62 years. Primary surgery was performed on 73.7% (48.1% stage I-II; 51.9% stage III-IV) and salvage surgery on 25.9% of patients. Positive margin rates were 4.3% for T1-2 and 25.8% for T3-4. None of the stage I-II patients and 27.7% of stage III-IV patients required adjuvant treatment. Reconstructive surgery was performed in 19.2% of all patients. Normal swallowing was achieved in 92.7% of patients at 6 months after surgery. 1- and 2-year survival rates for all patients were 94.5% and 89%, respectively. The overall complication rate was 16.1%. Bleeding occurred in 11.5% of patients. Longer hospitalization time was associated with surgical complications (P = 0.03) and reconstructive surgery (P = 0.03) but not with salvage surgery.

CONCLUSION

TORS is a safe and effective treatment for HPV-negative T1-2 OPSCC patients. The positive margin rate was worse in T3-4 patients, indicating the need for careful patient selection in this subgroup.

Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology Part 10: Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in Otolaryngology

Clinicians seek to pursue the most clinically effective treatment strategies, but costs have also become a key determinant in contemporary health care. Economic analyses have thus emerged as a valuable resource to both quantify and qualify the value of existing and emerging interventions and programs. Cost-effectiveness analyses estimate the benefits gained per monetary unit, providing insights to guide resource allocation. Herein, we delineate the related concepts and considerations to facilitate understanding and appraisal of these analyses, so as to better inform the stakeholders in our otolaryngology community.

Clinical Factors Associated With Cost in Head and Neck Cancer: Implications for a Bundled Payment Model

PURPOSE:

To determine which factors influence cost in head and neck cancer (HNC) to inform the development of a bundled payment model (BPM).

METHODS:

Patients with stages 0 to IVB (by American Joint Commission on Cancer, 7th edition) HNC of various sites and histology treated definitively at a single tertiary care center during 2013 were included. Clinical variables and direct cost data were obtained, and their associations were investigated using χ2, t, Wilcoxon rank sum, and analysis of variance testing. Results were used to develop a BPM.

RESULTS:

One hundred fifty patients were included; 87% were white, 74% were men, 48% had oropharyngeal cancer, and 58% had stage IVA disease. Treatment consisted of surgery alone (17%), radiation alone (11%), surgery plus radiation (14%), chemoradiation (45%), and surgery plus chemoradiation (13%). On multivariable analysis, both increasing group stage and number of treatment modalities used were significantly associated with higher cost. Given that stage often dictates treatment, we developed three cost tiers that were based on overall treatment modality. Tier A, the least costly, consisted of single-modality therapy with either surgery alone or radiation alone (median cost divided by the median overall cost of treatment, 0.54; 25th to 75th percentile range, 0.29 to 1.02), followed by tier B, which consisted of bimodality therapy with either chemoradiation or surgery plus radiation (1.03; range, 0.81 to 1.35), followed by tier C, which consisted of trimodality therapy with surgery plus chemoradiation (1.43; range, 1.10 to 1.96).

CONCLUSION:

The number of treatment modalities required is the primary driver of cost in HNC. These data can simplify development of a comprehensive HNC BPM.

Financial outcomes of transoral robotic surgery: A narrative review

OBJECTIVE

To determine the current cost impact and financial outcomes of transoral robotic surgery in Otolaryngology.

DATA SOURCES

A narrative review of the literature with a defined search strategy using Pubmed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science.

REVIEW METHODS

Using keywords ENT or otolaryngology, cost or economic, transoral robotic surgery or TORs, searches were performed in Pubmed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science and reviewed by the authors for inclusion and analysis.

RESULTS

Six total papers were deemed appropriate for analysis. All addressed cost impact of transoral robotic surgery (TORs) as compared to open surgical methods in treating oropharyngeal cancer and/or the identification of the primary tumor within unknown primary squamous cell carcinoma. Results showed TORs to be cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

Transoral robotic surgery is currently largely cost effective for both treatment and diagnostic procedures. However, further studies are needed to qualify long-term data.

Transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal cancer: patient selection and special considerations

The increasing incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) emphasizes the importance of optimizing treatment for the disease. Historical protocol has utilized definitive radiation and invasive open procedures; these techniques expose the patient to significant risks and morbidity. Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) has emerged as a therapeutic modality with promise. Here, the literature regarding proper patient selection and other considerations for this procedure was reviewed. Multiple patient and tumor-related factors were found to be relevant for successful use of this treatment strategy. Outcomes regarding early and advanced-stage OPSCC were analyzed. Finally, the literature regarding use of TORS in three distinct patient populations, individuals with primary OPSCC, carcinoma of unknown primary and those with recurrent OPSCC, was examined.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus Proton Therapy for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

To compared the cost-effectiveness of intensity modulated proton beam therapy (PBT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the management of stage III-IVB oropharynx cancer (OPC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A Markov model was constructed to compare IMRT with PBT for a 65-year-old patient with stage IVA OPSCC. We assumed PBT led to a 25% reduction in long-term xerostomia, short-term dysgeusia, and the need for gastrostomy tube. Fewer dental complications were also expected with PBT. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated, and value of information analyses were performed. The societal willingness-to-pay was defined as $100K per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

RESULTS

The ICERs for PBT for favorable human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive OPC were $288,000/QALY and $390,000/QALY in the payer perspective (PP) and societal perspective, respectively. Under nearly every scenario, PBT was not cost-effective, with ICERs above $150,000/QALY in the PP. The ICERs for HPV-negative OPC were typically greater than $250K/QALY in both perspectives. For HPV-positive patients, the ICER was less than $100,000/QALY in the PP only in younger patients who experienced a 50% reduction in both xerostomia and gastrostomy use. On probabilistic sensitivity analyses, there were 0% and 0.4% probabilities that PBT was cost-effective for 65- and 55-year old patients, respectively. The value of information was zero or negligible for all ages and perspectives at willingness-to-pay of $100,000/QALY and only meaningful in the PP for younger patients at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensity modulated proton beam therapy was only cost-effective in the PP if assumed to achieve profound reductions in long-term morbidity for younger patients; it was never cost-effective in the societal perspective. Prospective data are needed (and may be valuable) to better characterize the comparative toxicities of these treatments but are unlikely to change this calculation, except potentially in the most favorable cohort of patients.

[Robotic Surgery - Who is The Boss?]

In the head and neck region, great potential is seen in robot-assisted surgery (RAS). Mainly in cancer surgery, the use of robotic systems seems to be of interest. Until today, two robotic systems (DaVinci® und FLEX®) have gained approval for clinical use in the head and neck region, and multiple other systems are currently in pre-clinical testing. Although, certain groups of patients may benefit from RAS, no unbiased randomized clinical studies are available. Until today, it was not possible to satisfactorily prove any advantage of RAS as compared to standard procedures. The limited clinical benefit and the additional financial burden seem to be the main reasons, why the comprehensive application of RAS has not been realized so far.This review article describes the large variety of clinical applications for RAS in the head and neck region. In addition, the financial and technical challenges, as well as ongoing developments of RAS are highlighted. Special focus is put on risks associated with RAS and current clinical studies. We believe, that RAS will find its way into clinical routine during the next years. Therefore, medical staff will have to increasingly face the technical, scientific and ethical features of RAS.