The cost-effectiveness of selective lymphadenectomy based on a preoperative prediction model in patients with endometrial cancer: Insights from the US and Korean healthcare systems

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in the patients with advanced previously treated endometrial cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis in the United States and in China

PURPOSE

To investigate the cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (LP) compared to chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for advanced endometrial cancer (EC) from the United States and Chinese payers' perspective.

METHODS

In this economic evaluation, a partitioned survival model was constructed from the perspective of the United States and Chinese payers. The survival data were derived from the clinical trial (309-KEYNOTE-775), while costs and utility values were sourced from databases and published literature. Total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were estimated. The robustness of the model was evaluated through sensitivity analyses, and price adjustment scenario analyses was also performed.

RESULTS

Base-case analysis indicated that LP wouldn't be cost-effective in the United States at the WTP threshold of $200 000, with improved effectiveness of 0.75 QALYs and an additional cost of $398596.81 (ICER $531392.20). While LP was cost-effective in China, with improved effectiveness of 0.75 QALYs and an increased overall cost of $62270.44 (ICER $83016.29). Sensitivity analyses revealed that the above results were stable. The scenario analyses results indicated that LP was cost-effective in the United States when the prices of lenvatinib and pembrolizumab were simultaneously reduced by 61.95% ($26.5361/mg for lenvatinib and $19.1532/mg for pembrolizumab).

CONCLUSION

LP isn't cost-effective in the patients with advanced previously treated endometrial cancer in the United States, whereas it is cost-effective in China. The evidence-based pricing strategy provided by this study could benefit decision-makers in making optimal decisions and clinicians in general clinical practice. More evidence about budget impact and affordability for patients is needed.

Medicolegal, infrastructural, and financial aspects in gynecologic cancer surgery and their implications in decision making processes: Quo Vadis?

Surgical decision making is complex and involves a combination of analytic, intuitive, and cognitive processes. Medicolegal, infrastructural, and financial factors may influence these processes depending on the context and setting, but to what extent can they influence surgical decision making in gynecologic oncology? This scoping review evaluates existing literature related to medicolegal, infrastructural, and financial aspects of gynecologic cancer surgery and their implications in surgical decision making. Our objective was to summarize the findings and limitations of published research, identify gaps in the literature, and make recommendations for future research to inform policy.

Three Lymphadenectomy Strategies in Low-Risk Endometrial Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-utility of three lymphadenectomy strategies in the management of low-risk endometrial carcinoma.

METHODS

A decision analysis model compared three lymphadenectomy strategies in women undergoing minimally invasive surgery for low-risk endometrial carcinoma: 1) routine lymphadenectomy in all patients, 2) selective lymphadenectomy based on intraoperative frozen section criteria, and 3) sentinel lymph node mapping. Costs and outcomes were obtained from published literature and Medicare reimbursement rates. Costs categories consisted of hospital, physician, operating room, pathology, and lymphedema treatment. Effectiveness was defined as 3-year disease-specific survival adjusted for the effect of lymphedema (utility=0.8) on quality of life. A cost-utility analysis was performed comparing the different strategies. Multiple deterministic sensitivity analyses were done.

RESULTS

In the base-case scenario, routine lymphadenectomy had a cost of $18,041 and an effectiveness of 2.79 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Selective lymphadenectomy had a cost of $17,036 and an effectiveness of 2.81 QALYs, whereas sentinel lymph node mapping had a cost of $16,401 and an effectiveness of 2.87 QALYs. With a difference of $1,005 and 0.02 QALYs, selective lymphadenectomy was both less costly and more effective than routine lymphadenectomy, dominating it. However, with the lowest cost and highest effectiveness, sentinel lymph node mapping dominated the other modalities and was the most cost-effective strategy. These findings were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses varying the rates of lymphedema and lymphadenectomy, surgical approach (open or minimally invasive surgery), lymphedema utility, and costs. For the estimated 40,000 women undergoing surgery for low-risk endometrial carcinoma each year in the United States, the annual cost of routine lymphadenectomy, selective lymphadenectomy, and sentinel lymph node mapping would be $722 million, $681 million, and $656 million, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Compared with routine and selective lymphadenectomy, sentinel lymph node mapping had the lowest costs and highest quality-adjusted survival, making it the most cost-effective strategy in the management of low-risk endometrial carcinoma.

Treatment Preferences for Routine Lymphadenectomy Versus No Lymphadenectomy in Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer

BACKGROUND

Debate on the value of lymphadenectomy continues in endometrial cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate patient and clinician preferences for routine lymphadenectomy versus no lymphadenectomy in the surgical management of endometrial cancer.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment and trade-off question were designed and distributed to 103 endometrial cancer patients and 90 gynecologic oncologists. Participant preferences were quantified with regression analysis using scenarios based on three attributes: 5-year progression-free survival and the rates of acute and chronic complication. A trade-off technique varying the risk of recurrence for no lymphadenectomy was used to quantify any additional risk of recurrence that these participants would accept to receive no lymphadenectomy instead of routine lymphadenectomy.

RESULTS

On the basis of discrete choice experiment, the recurrence rate and lymphedema risk had a statistically significant impact on respondents' preference. The trade-off question showed that the median additional accepted risk of having no lymphadenectomy was 2.8% for gynecologic oncologists (0.5-14%) and 3.0% for patients (0.5-10%), but this difference was not significant (p = 0.620). Patients who were younger or had a higher education level or no history of delivery or shorter duration since diagnosis were prepared to accept higher additional risks of having no lymphadenectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the majority of endometrial cancer patients and clinicians will accept a small amount of recurrence risk to reduce the incidence of lymphedema. Regarding preference heterogeneity among patients, our results show that it is important for surgeons to take a patient-tailored approach when discussing surgical management.

Value of Information in Asia: Concepts, Current Use, and Future Directions

Health technology assessment is a form of health policy research that provides policymakers with information relevant to decisions about policy alternatives. Findings from cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) are one of the important aspects of health technology assessment. Nevertheless, the more advanced method of value of information (VOI), which is recommended by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and Society for Medical Decision Making Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force, has rarely been applied in CEA studies in Asia. The lack of VOI in Asian CEA studies may be due to limited understanding of VOI methods and what VOI can and cannot help policy decision makers accomplish. This concept article offers audiences a practical primer in understanding the calculation, presentation, and policy implications of VOI. In addition, it provides a rapid survey of health technology assessment guidelines and literature related to VOI in Asia and discusses the future directions of VOI use in Asia and its potential barriers. This article will enable health economists, outcomes researchers, and policymakers in Asia to better understand the importance of VOI analysis and its implications, leading to the appropriate use of VOI in Asia.

Preoperative assessment of lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer: A Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group study

BACKGROUND

Previously proposed criteria for preoperatively identifying endometrial cancer patients at low risk for lymph node metastasis remain to be verified. For this purpose, a prospective, multicenter observational study was performed.

METHODS

Eligible patients with histologically confirmed endometrial cancer underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and serum cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) testing before surgery. The following criteria were used to identify low-risk patients: 1) endometrioid-type cancer, 2) no evidence of deep myometrial invasion on MRI, 3) no enlarged lymph nodes on MRI, 4) no suspicious metastasis out of the uterine corpus, and 5) serum CA 125 levels less than 35 U/mL. Systematic pelvic and/or para-aortic lymphadenectomy was performed for all patients. The primary endpoint was estimation of the negative predictive value (NPV).

RESULTS

From January 2012 to December 2014, 529 patients from 20 hospitals in 3 Asian countries were consecutively enrolled. According to our criteria, 272 patients (51.4%) were categorized into the low-risk group. Fifty-three of the 529 patients (10.0%) had lymph node metastases; these patients included 8 (2.9%) falsely categorized as low-risk. The sensitivity and specificity of the criteria were 84.9% and 55.5%, respectively. The NPV of 97.1% was higher than the predefined target endpoint of 96%.

CONCLUSIONS

The low-risk criteria based on preoperative tests were confirmed to be reliable and accurate for identifying patients at low risk for lymph node metastasis. These criteria may facilitate patient counseling and surgical decision making. Cancer 2017;123:263-272. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Treatment preferences of advanced ovarian cancer patients for adding bevacizumab to first-line therapy

BACKGROUND

The GOG-218 and ICON-7 studies recently showed that adding bevacizumab to first-line therapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer increased progression-free survival. However, the high cost and long treatment duration prevents the incorporation of bevacizumab in practice. The aim of this study was to explore and quantify patients' preferences for adding bevacizumab to first-line therapy.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) and trade-off question were designed and distributed to 102 ovarian cancer patients. Participants were asked to choose between two hypothetical first-line therapies that differed in terms of effectiveness, safety, and the financial burden. A trade-off technique varying the cost of bevacizumab was used to quantify a willingness-to-pay threshold for selecting bevacizumab.

RESULTS

All attributes of the DCE had a statistically significant impact on respondents' preferences and the financial burden was the most important attribute. The results of the trade-off question showed that more than half of patients would prefer to add bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy when the cost of the drug was reduced to 17% (1/6) of the baseline cost.

CONCLUSION

Patients' preferences for bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of ovarian cancer depend primarily on drug costs. Our results suggest that the current cost of bevacizumab is sufficiently high that the majority of ovarian cancer patients are not willing to pay to accept a small increase in progression-free survival.