Cost-Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy versus Primary Surgery in Elderly Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer

Economic Evaluation of Neoadjuvant Versus Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

In the absence of evidence on whether neoadjuvant (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) is more beneficial for various tumor treatments, economic evaluation (EE) can assist medical decision making. There is limited evidence on their cost-effectiveness and their prospective evaluation is less likely in the future. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis about EE for NAC versus AC in solid tumor help compare these therapies from various perspectives.

METHODS

Various databases were searched for studies published from inception to 2021. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines and economic-specific guidelines. The data were pooled using a random effects model when possible.

RESULTS

The retrieval identified 15 EE studies of NAC versus AC in 8 types of cancer. NAC is the dominant strategy for pancreatic, head and neck, rectal, prostate cancers and colorectal liver metastases. For ovarian cancer, NAC is cost-effective with a lower cost and higher or similar quality-adjusted life-year. There were no significant differences in cost and outcomes for lung cancer. For stage IV or high-risk patients with ovarian or prostate cancer, NAC was cost-effective but not for patients who were not high risk.

CONCLUSIONS

The EEs results for NAC versus AC were inconsistent because of their different model structures, assumptions, cost inclusions, and a shortage of studies. There are multiple sources of heterogeneity across EEs evidence synthesis. More high-quality EE studies on NAC versus AC in initial cancer treatment are necessary.

Multi-Disciplinary Care Planning of Ovarian Cancer in Older Patients: General Statement-A Position Paper from SOFOG-GINECO-FRANCOGYN-SFPO

Simple Summary

This position paper aims to provide practitioners a proposal for multidisciplinary care planning for older patients with ovarian cancer from the time of suspected diagnosis. The first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer involves several interdependent sequences: cytoreductive surgery, (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and maintenance targeted treatments. In older patients, care planning must be adapted to their geriatric parameters and consider the geriatric impact of each treatment sequence to allow treatment completion. Care planning should be centered on patient motivation and imply multidisciplinarity. Each step of treatment plan should be reconsidered in light of a geriatric assessment and follow-up. Studies are needed to prospectively evaluate the impact of geriatric vulnerability parameters at each step of the treatment agenda and the impact of geriatric interventions on patient outcomes.

Abstract

In this position paper the Société Francophone d’OncoGériatrie (SOFOG; French-speaking oncogeriatric society), the Société Française de Pharmacie Oncologique (SFPO, French society for oncology pharmacy), the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux pour l’Étude des Cancers de l’Ovaire et du sein (GINECO, National Investigators’ Group for Studies in Ovarian and Breast Cancer) and the Groupe Français de chirurgie Oncologique et Gynécologique (FRANCOGYN) propose a multi-disciplinary care planning of ovarian cancer in older patients. The treatment pathway is based on four successive decisional nodes (diagnosis, resectability assessment, operability assessment, adjuvant, and maintenance treatment decision) implying multidisciplinarity and adaptation of the treatment plan according to the patient’s geriatric covariates and her motivation towards treatment. Specific attention must be paid to geriatric intervention, supportive care and pharmaceutical conciliation. Studies are needed to prospectively evaluate the impact of geriatric vulnerability parameters at each step of the treatment agenda and the impact of geriatric interventions on patient outcomes.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery versus surgery followed by chemotherapy for initial treatment in advanced ovarian epithelial cancer

BACKGROUND

Epithelial ovarian cancer presents at an advanced stage in the majority of women. These women require a combination of surgery and chemotherapy for optimal treatment. Conventional treatment has been to perform surgery first and then give chemotherapy. However, there may be advantages to using chemotherapy before surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether there is an advantage to treating women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer with chemotherapy before debulking surgery (neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)) compared with conventional treatment where chemotherapy follows debulking surgery (primary debulking surgery (PDS)).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 9 October 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase via Ovid, MEDLINE (Silver Platter/Ovid), PDQ and MetaRegister. We also checked the reference lists of relevant papers that were identified to search for further studies. The main investigators of relevant trials were contacted for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (Federation of International Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) stage III/IV) who were randomly allocated to treatment groups that compared platinum-based chemotherapy before cytoreductive surgery with platinum-based chemotherapy following cytoreductive surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in each included trial. We extracted data of overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events, surgically-related mortality and morbidity and quality of life outcomes.  We used GRADE methods to determine the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 2227 titles and abstracts through our searches, of which five RCTs of varying quality and size met the inclusion criteria. These studies assessed a total of 1774 women with stage IIIc/IV ovarian cancer randomised to NACT followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) or PDS followed by chemotherapy. We pooled results of the four studies where data were available and found little or no difference with regard to overall survival (OS) (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.96, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.08; participants = 1692; studies = 4; high-certainty evidence) or progression-free survival in four trials where we were able to pool data (Hazard Ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.08; participants = 1692; studies = 4; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, surgical morbidity and quality of life (QoL) outcomes were variably and incompletely reported across studies. There are probably clinically meaningful differences in favour of NACT compared to PDS with regard to overall postoperative serious adverse effects (SAE grade 3+): 6% in NACT group, versus 29% in PDS group, (risk ratio (RR) 0.22, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.38; participants = 435; studies = 2; heterogeneity index (I2) = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). NACT probably results in a large reduction in the need for stoma formation: 5.9% in NACT group, versus 20.4% in PDS group, (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.74; participants = 632; studies = 2; I2 = 70%; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the risk of needing bowel resection at the time of surgery: 13.0% in NACT group versus 26.6% in PDS group (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.79; participants = 1565; studies = 4; I2 = 79%; moderate-certainty evidence). NACT reduces postoperative mortality: 0.6% in NACT group, versus 3.6% in PDS group, (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.46; participants = 1623; studies = 5; I2 = 0%; high-certainty evidence). QoL on the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) scale produced inconsistent and imprecise results in three studies (MD -0.29, 95% CI -2.77 to 2.20; participants = 524; studies = 3; I2 = 81%; very low-certainty evidence) but the evidence is very uncertain and should be interpreted with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available high to moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is little or no difference in primary survival outcomes between PDS and NACT. NACT probably reduces the risk of serious adverse events, especially those around the time of surgery, and reduces the risk of postoperative mortality and the need for stoma formation. These data will inform women and clinicians (involving specialist gynaecological multidisciplinary teams) and allow treatment to be tailored to the person, taking into account surgical resectability, age, histology, stage and performance status. Data from an unpublished study and ongoing studies are awaited.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy for cT2-4N0-1 non-small cell lung cancer patients during initial treatment phase

Objective

The choice between neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) remains controversial in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). There is no significant difference in NAC and AC’s effectiveness. We investigate the cost-effectiveness of NAC versus AC for NSCLC.

Method

A decision tree model was designed from a payer perspective to compare NAC and AC treatments for NSCLC patients. Parameters included overall survival (OS), surgical complications, chemotherapy adverse events (AEs), treatment initiation probability, treatment time frame, treatment cost, and quality of life (QOL). Sensitivity analyses were performed to characterize model uncertainty in the base cases.

Result

AC treatment strategy produced a cost saving of ¥3064.90 and incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) of 0.10 years per patient with the same OS. NAC would be cost-effective at a ¥35,446/QALY threshold if the median OS of NAC were 2.3 months more than AC. The model was robust enough to handle variations to all input parameters except OS. In the probability sensitivity analysis, AC remained dominant in 54.4% of simulations.

Conclusion

The model cost-effectiveness analysis indicates that with operable NSCLC, AC treatment is more cost-effective to NAC. If NAC provides a longer survival advantage, this treatment strategy may be cost-effective. The OS is the main factor that influences cost-effectiveness and should be considered in therapeutic regimes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00280-w.

Chemotherapy versus surgery for initial treatment in advanced ovarian epithelial cancer

BACKGROUND

Epithelial ovarian cancer presents at an advanced stage in the majority of women. These women require surgery and chemotherapy for optimal treatment. Conventional treatment has been to perform surgery first and then give chemotherapy. However, there may be advantages to using chemotherapy before surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether there is an advantage to treating women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer with chemotherapy before debulking surgery (neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)) compared with conventional treatment where chemotherapy follows debulking surgery (primary debulking surgery (PDS)).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 11 February 2019: CENTRAL, Embase via Ovid, MEDLINE (Silver Platter/Ovid), PDQ and MetaRegister. We also checked the reference lists of relevant papers that were identified to search for further studies. The main investigators of relevant trials were contacted for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (Federation of International Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) stage III/IV) who were randomly allocated to treatment groups that compared platinum-based chemotherapy before cytoreductive surgery with platinum-based chemotherapy following cytoreductive surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in each included trial.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 1952 potential titles, with a most recent search date of February 2019, of which five RCTs of varying quality and size met the inclusion criteria. These studies assessed a total of 1713 women with stage IIIc/IV ovarian cancer randomised to NACT followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) or PDS followed by chemotherapy. We pooled results of the three studies where data were available and found little or no difference with regard to overall survival (OS) (1521 women; Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.95, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) or progression-free survival in four trials where we were able to pool data (1631 women; HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, surgical morbidity and quality of life (QoL) outcomes were poorly and incompletely reported across studies. There may be clinically meaningful differences in favour of NACT compared to PDS with regard to serious adverse effects (SAE grade 3+). These data suggest that NACT may reduce the risk of need for blood transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 0.80; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.99; four studies,1085 women; low-certainty evidence), venous thromboembolism (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.90; four studies, 1490 women; low-certainty evidence), infection (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.56; four studies, 1490 women; moderate-certainty evidence), compared to PDS. NACT probably reduces the need for stoma formation (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.72; two studies, 581 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and bowel resection (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.92; three studies, 1213 women; moderate-certainty evidence), as well as reducing postoperative mortality (RR 0.18; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.54:five studies, 1571 women; moderate-certainty evidence). QoL on the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale produced inconsistent and imprecise results in two studies (MD -1.34, 95% CI -2.36 to -0.32; participants = 307; very low-certainty evidence) and use of the QLQC-30 and QLQC-Ov28 in another study (MD 7.60, 95% CI 1.89 to 13.31; participants = 217; very low-certainty evidence) meant that little could be inferred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is little or no difference in primary survival outcomes between PDS and NACT. NACT may reduce the risk of serious adverse events, especially those around the time of surgery, and the need for bowel resection and stoma formation. These data will inform women and clinicians and allow treatment to be tailored to the person, taking into account surgical resectability, age, histology, stage and performance status. Data from an unpublished study and ongoing studies are awaited.

Clinical Utility of Preoperative Assessment in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreduction

Ovarian cancer is the deadliest gynecologic cancer, in part due to late presentation. Many women have vague early symptoms and present with disseminated disease. Cytoreductive surgery can be extensive, involving multiple organ systems. Novel therapies and recent clinical trials have provided evidence that, compared to primary cytoreduction, neoadjuvant chemotherapy has equivalent survival outcomes with less morbidity. There is increasing need for validated tools and mechanisms for clinicians to determine the optimal management of ovarian cancer patients.

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review

Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100-1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria.

Simulated Costs of the ASCO Patient-Centered Oncology Payment Model in Medicare Beneficiaries With Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer

PURPOSE

Efforts to curb the rising costs of cancer care while improving quality include alternative payment models (APMs), which offer incentives to reduce avoidable spending and provide high-quality and cost-efficient care. The impact of proposed APMs has not been quantified in real-world practice. In this study, we evaluated ASCO's Patient-Centered Oncology Payment (PCOP) model in existing fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries to understand the magnitude of potential cost savings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SEER-Medicare data were used to identify women with advanced ovarian cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2012 who either (1) underwent primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy or (2) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. Medicare payments in each cohort were used to compare FFS and PCOP and to estimate the potential for cost savings across health care services received, including outpatient emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and imaging.

RESULTS

Three thousand seven hundred seventy-seven primary debulking surgery and 866 neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients were included in the study, with mean total costs of $75,433 and $95,138 in 2016 US$, respectively Most costs were related to chemotherapy or hospitalization. Additional PCOP-related payments would be offset if hospitalizations could be reduced by 11.6% or imaging claims by 88%.

CONCLUSION

APMs have the potential to reduce costs of current FFS reimbursement via either a large reduction in imaging or a modest reduction in hospitalizations during treatment of ovarian cancer. PCOP is a reasonable payment structure for oncologists if the additional payments can provide the necessary resources to invest in improved coordination of care.

Chemotherapy versus surgery for initial treatment in advanced ovarian epithelial cancer

BACKGROUND

Epithelial ovarian cancer presents at an advanced stage in the majority of women. These women require surgery and chemotherapy for optimal treatment. Conventional treatment has been to perform surgery first and then give chemotherapy. However, there may be advantages to using chemotherapy before surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether there is an advantage to treating women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer with chemotherapy before debulking surgery (neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)) compared with conventional treatment where chemotherapy follows debulking surgery (primary debulking surgery (PDS)).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 11 February 2019: CENTRAL, Embase via Ovid, MEDLINE (Silver Platter/Ovid), PDQ and MetaRegister. We also checked the reference lists of relevant papers that were identified to search for further studies. The main investigators of relevant trials were contacted for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (Federation of International Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO) stage III/IV) who were randomly allocated to treatment groups that compared platinum-based chemotherapy before cytoreductive surgery with platinum-based chemotherapy following cytoreductive surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in each included trial.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 1952 potential titles, with a most recent search date of February 2019, of which five RCTs of varying quality and size met the inclusion criteria. These studies assessed a total of 1713 women with stage IIIc/IV ovarian cancer randomised to NACT followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS) or PDS followed by chemotherapy. We pooled results of the three studies where data were available and found little or no difference with regard to overall survival (OS) (1521 women; hazard ratio (HR) 1.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.19, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) or progression-free survival in four trials where we were able to pool data (1631 women; HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.13, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, surgical morbidity and quality of life (QoL) outcomes were poorly and incompletely reported across studies. There may be clinically meaningful differences in favour of NACT compared to PDS with regard to serious adverse effects (SAE grade 3+). These data suggest that NACT may reduce the risk of need for blood transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 0.80; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.99; four studies,1085 women; low-certainty evidence), venous thromboembolism (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.90; four studies, 1490 women; low-certainty evidence), infection (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.56; four studies, 1490 women; moderate-certainty evidence), compared to PDS. NACT probably reduces the need for stoma formation (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.72; two studies, 581 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and bowel resection (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.92; three studies, 1213 women; moderate-certainty evidence), as well as reducing postoperative mortality (RR 0.18; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.54:five studies, 1571 women; moderate-certainty evidence). QoL on the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale produced inconsistent and imprecise results in two studies (MD -1.34, 95% CI -2.36 to -0.32; participants = 307; very low-certainty evidence) and use of the QLQC-30 and QLQC-Ov28 in another study (MD 7.60, 95% CI 1.89 to 13.31; participants = 217; very low-certainty evidence) meant that little could be inferred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is little or no difference in primary survival outcomes between PDS and NACT. NACT may reduce the risk of serious adverse events, especially those around the time of surgery, and the need for bowel resection and stoma formation. These data will inform women and clinicians and allow treatment to be tailored to the person, taking into account surgical resectability, age, histology, stage and performance status. Data from an unpublished study and ongoing studies are awaited.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of capecitabine plus bevacizumab versus capecitabine alone in elderly patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer from Chinese societal perspective

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of capecitabine plus bevacizumab compared with capecitabine alone in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) from a Chinese societal perspective.

METHODS

A decision-analytic Markov model was conducted to simulate the process of metastatic CRC. Three distinct health states: progression-free survival (PFS), progressive disease and death were included. Clinical data were derived from the AVEX trial. Health effectiveness was denoted in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health utilities were derived from previously published studies. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was regarded as the primary endpoint and willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at $26,753.37/QALY (3 × per capita GDP of China, 2017). One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were also performed to explore the parameters uncertainty in the study.

RESULTS

Over a 10-year life horizon, capecitabine plus bevacizumab gained 1.14 QALYs at an average cost of $21,609.48, while the effectiveness and cost of capecitabine group were 0.99 QALYs and $7274.83, respectively. The ICER between the two groups was $95,564.33/QALY. Parameters that mostly influenced the results of the model were utility of PFS state, duration of PFS state for capecitabine plus bevacizumab, total cost of PFS state for capecitabine plus bevacizumab and price of bevacizumab. The probabilities of capecitabine plus bevacizumab and capecitabine as the dominant option were 0% and 100% at the WTP threshold of $26,753.37/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study showed that capecitabine plus bevacizumab is unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment option for elderly patients with metastatic CRC.

[Epithelial ovarian cancer and elderly patients. Article drafted from the French Guidelines in oncology entitled "Initial management of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer" developed by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, GINECO-ARCAGY under the aegis of CNGOF and endorsed by INCa]

In ovarian, tubal and primary peritoneal cancers, older adults have an over-mortality due to more aggressive disease (NP4), surgical and chemotherapy under treatment (NP4) and co-morbidities (NP4). Older age is at higher risk for postoperative morbidity and mortality (NP4). Surgery is more often incomplete in this elderly population (NP4). Older age is a risk factor for lower dose intensity in adjuvant chemotherapy (NP4) and incomplete chemotherapy (NP4). Nevertheless, the benefit of a complete surgery remains identical to that of the younger population (NP2). Preoperative functional assessment identifies patients at risk for postoperative complications (NP4). The perioperative risk depends on three variables, the ASA score, the age and the complexity score of the surgery (NP4). It is recommended to perform cytoreduction surgery in an expert centre (grade C) and on the basis of geriatric expertise analysing functional and physical performance (grade C). The benefit/risk balance of surgery should be assessed on a case-by-case basis for the most at-risk (NP4) populations defined by: (i) age≥80 years, especially if albuminemia≤37g/L; (ii) age≥75 years and FIGO stage IV; (iii) age≥75 years, stage FIGO III and≥1 comorbidity. A comprehensive geriatric assessment is recommended prior to the management of an elderly person with primary ovarian, tubal or peritoneal cancer (grade C). The GVS (Geriatric Vulnerability Score) is used to identify vulnerable elderly patients (NP2). In fit elderly patients, it is recommended to perform intravenous chemotherapy identical to that of younger patients (ie platinum-based dual therapy) (grade B). In vulnerable elderly patients, various adapted chemotherapy regimens have been prospectively evaluated in non-comparative trials, and seem feasible considering specific and nonspecific toxicities: carboplatin monotherapy (NP2), carboplatin AUC2+paclitaxel 60mg/m² 3 weeks/4 (NP2), carboplatin AUC 4-5+paclitaxel 135mg/m²/3 weeks (NP2), carboplatin AUC5/3 weeks+paclitaxel 60mg/m²/week (NP3). In the absence of comparative data, no recommendation can be made in this population. Primary chemotherapy decreases the complexity of the surgical procedure and perioperative morbidity and mortality during interval surgery (NP1). It should be considered after 70 years in cases of comorbidities and/or peritoneal carcinomatosis sufficient for complex initial surgery (NP4).

The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to performed a meta-analysis and systematic review on the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS) in advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for relevant articles. All statistical analyses were performed in Review Manager 5.3.5.

RESULTS

In two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.81-1.06) or progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.86-1.09). Few adverse events (HR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19-0.72) and a high optimal debulking surgery rate (HR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.50-1.91) were observed with NACT. In 22 observational studies, primary debulking surgery (PDS) yielded better OS (HR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.19-1.60) but not progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.86-1.23). An increased optimal cytoreduction rate (HR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.12-1.22) was observed with NACT. Irrespective of the degree of residual disease, OS was longer in the PDS group than that in the NACT group. Patients with FIGO stage III (HR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.05-1.95) and IV (HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.06-1.23) disease had better survival with PDS.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with NACT-IDS improves perioperative outcomes and optimal cytoreduction rates, but it may not improve OS. NACT-IDS is not inferior to PDS-CT in terms of survival outcomes in selected AOC patients. Future studies should focus on candidate selection for NACT.

Cost effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery versus primary cytoreductive surgery for patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer during the initial treatment phase

OBJECTIVE

Advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) can be treated with either neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) or primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS). Although randomized controlled trials show that NACT is non-inferior in overall survival compared to PCS, there may be improvement in short-term morbidity. We sought to investigate the cost-effectiveness of NACT relative to PCS for AEOC from the US Medicare perspective.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov model with a 7-month time horizon comparing (1) 3cycles of NACT with carboplatin and paclitaxel (CT), followed by interval cytoreductive surgery, then 3 additional cycles of CT, or (2) PCS followed by 6cycles of CT. Input parameters included probability of chemotherapy complications, surgical complications, treatment completion, treatment costs, and utilities. Model outcomes included costs, life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), in terms of cost per life-year gained and cost per QALY gained. We accounted for differences in surgical complexity by incorporating the cost of additional procedures and the probability of undergoing those procedures. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed via Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

NACT resulted in a savings of $7034 per patient with a 0.035 QALY increase compared to PCS; therefore, NACT dominated PCS in the base case analysis. With PSA, NACT was the dominant strategy more than 99% of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

In the short-term, NACT is a cost-effective alternative compared to PCS in women with AEOC. These results may translate to longer term cost-effectiveness; however, data from randomized control trials continues to mature.

Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopy as diagnostic tool before primary cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a diagnostic laparoscopy prior to primary cytoreductive surgery to prevent futile primary cytoreductive surgery (i.e. leaving >1cm residual disease) in patients suspected of advanced stage ovarian cancer.

METHODS

An economic analysis was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial in which patients suspected of advanced stage ovarian cancer who qualified for primary cytoreductive surgery were randomized to either laparoscopy or primary cytoreductive surgery. Direct medical costs from a health care perspective over a 6-month time horizon were analyzed. Health outcomes were expressed in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and utility was based on patient's response to the EQ-5D questionnaires. We primarily focused on direct medical costs based on Dutch standard prices.

RESULTS

We studied 201 patients, of whom 102 were randomized to laparoscopy and 99 to primary cytoreductive surgery. No significant difference in QALYs (utility=0.01; 95% CI 0.006 to 0.02) was observed. Laparoscopy reduced the number of futile laparotomies from 39% to 10%, while its costs were € 1400 per intervention, making the overall costs of both strategies comparable (difference € -80 per patient (95% CI -470 to 300)). Findings were consistent across various sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

In patients with suspected advanced stage ovarian cancer, a diagnostic laparoscopy reduced the number of futile laparotomies, without increasing total direct medical health care costs, or adversely affecting complications or quality of life.

Association between social support and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms among Chinese patients with ovarian cancer: A multiple mediation model

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms can develop after person experiences one or more traumatic events. Little research, however, has been done on PTSD symptoms of patients with ovarian cancer. The present study aimed to estimate the prevalence of PTSD symptoms in patients with ovarian cancer in China; the effects of demographic and clinical variables on PTSD symptoms; multiple mediation roles in the association between social support and PTSD symptoms in patients with ovarian cancer in China. We collected demographic and clinical information of patients with ovarian cancer in the first and second hospitals of China Medical University between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2015. Qualified patients were asked to complete the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist-Civilian Version (PCL-C), Duke-UNC Functional Social Support Questionnaire, Herth Hope Index (HHI), and Resilience Scale-14 (RS-14). 201 patients provided responses. We performed hierarchical linear regression to assess the correlation between social support and PTSD symptoms and bootstrapping to test the mediating role of hope and resilience as potential mediators. After controlling demographic and clinical characteristics, social support negatively correlated with PTSD symptoms (β = -0.406, P < 0.01). Social support explained 14.7% of the variance in PTSD symptoms. Hope and resilience explained 17.0% of the variance in PTSD symptoms. The proportion of the hope mediating effect was 43.37% for social support and the proportion of the resilience mediating effect was 10.64% for social support. Hope and resilience partly mediated the correlation between social support and PTSD symptoms despite accounting for different proportions of the mediating effect. Future intervention plans should pay more attention to social support as well as hope and resilience to prevent, relieve and treat PTSD symptoms.

The Use of “Optimal Cytoreduction” Nomenclature in Ovarian Cancer Literature: Can We Move Toward a More Optimal Classification System?

Objectives

The objective of this study is to explore how cytoreductive surgical outcomes such as residual disease (RD) and use of the term “optimal cytoreduction” (OCR) have changed over time in the ovarian cancer literature.

Methods

We identified all English-language publications referring to ovarian cancer cytoreduction for a 12-year period. Publications were evaluated for how the diameter of RD was categorized and whether OCR was defined. In addition, the use of RD and OCR terminology trends over time and associations between terminology and the region of corresponding author, study type, and journal impact factor were explored.

Results

Of the 772 publications meeting inclusion criteria, the RD stratification points used to demarcate patient groups were as follows: 0 mm (45%), 5 mm (3.6%), 10 mm (65%), and 20 mm (24%). The use of 0-mm RD (odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.05–1.15) and 10-mm RD (OR, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.09–1.20) to delineate patient outcomes increased over time. The use of OCR terminology did not change over time but was more commonly used in clinical studies as well as those from North America. Many studies (70%) defined OCR as less than or equal to 10-mm RD, whereas 30% defined OCR differently or not at all.

Conclusions

Optimal cytoreduction terminology remains ambiguous and inconsistently used in the ovarian cancer surgical literature. On the basis of this literature review, we propose a novel classification system to categorize RD without reference to OCR while accurately and succinctly identifying meaningful clinical subgroups and minimizing bias.

Use of Hematopoietic Growth Factors and Risk of Thromboembolic and Pulmonary Toxicities in Elderly Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk of thromboembolic and pulmonary toxicities associated with hematopoietic growth factor (HGF) use (i.e., erythropoietin-stimulating agent [ESA] and/or colony-stimulating factor [CSF]) in a community-dwelling cohort of elderly patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We studied 8,188 women, 65 years and older from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare linked database, diagnosed from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2009. Patients were categorized into five groups: no chemotherapy and no ESA/CSF (n = 2,616), chemotherapy but no ESA/CSF (n = 1,854), ESA only (n = 1,313), CSF only (n = 743), and ESA + CSF (n = 1,662). We reported the cumulative incidence of toxicities for 2, 6, and greater than 6 months, and the incidence density for the overall follow-up. Cox-proportional hazards regression was performed to determine risk of toxicities.

RESULTS

Of the 5,572 patients receiving chemotherapy, 66.7% (n = 3,718) received HGF supportive treatment, 29.8% received ESA + CSF, 23.6% received ESA only, and 13.3% received CSF only. Patients who received chemotherapy and also ESA + CSF had a 14.1% cumulative incidence of thromboembolic event (TEE) at 6 months of follow-up compared with 8.0% in those who received chemotherapy without growth factor and 3.2% in those with neither chemotherapy nor growth factor. Those with chemotherapy who received ESA + CSF had a significantly higher risk of TEE (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.47) as compared with patients with chemotherapy and no ESA/CSF, although patients aged 85 years and older may experience up to a five-fold increased risk. The risk of pulmonary toxicities did not significantly differ by HGF use.

CONCLUSIONS

An increased risk of TEEs was observed in elderly patients with ovarian cancer who received ESA + CSF. The risk-benefit ratio for administering HGF should be carefully evaluated, especially among those 85 years and older.