Cost-effectiveness analysis of dose-dense versus standard intravenous chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: An economic analysis of results from the Gynecologic Oncology Group protocol 262 randomized controlled trial

Advances in research on malignant transformation of endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer

Endometriosis (EMs) is a prevalent chronic gynecological condition that depends on estrogen, marked by the presence of active endometrial tissue (glands and stroma) outside the uterus. Although pathologically benign, it exhibits biological behaviors such as invasion and metastasis akin to malignant tumors. Endometriosis-associated ovarian carcinoma (EAOC), arising from malignant transformation of EMs, poses significant clinical challenges. However, the mechanisms underlying EAOC pathogenesis remain incompletely understood, with a lack of reliable biomarkers for early diagnosis and personalized treatment strategies. Considering the significant number of EMs patients and the extended period during which malignant transformation can occur, EAOC deserves significant attention. Current research both domestically and internationally indicates that the pathogenesis of EAOC is complex, involving genetic mutations, immune microenvironment, oxidative stress, epigenetic changes, and related areas. This review summarizes the mechanisms underlying the development of EAOC.

A single institutional clinical outcome for stages III and IV ovarian cancer patients treated with dose-dense TC therapy in the frontline or first platinum-sensitive relapse setting

AIM

Dose-dense paclitaxel /carboplatin (ddTC) therapy was shown to be more effective against ovarian cancer than conventional tri-weekly TC in the JGOG3016 study. However, two phase III studies performed after JGOG3016 did not show the same positive results. Because we have been using ddTC in the frontline or first platinum-sensitive relapse of ovarian cancer, we investigated the clinical outcome of the patients treated with ddTC.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined the response rate (RR), progression free survival (PFS) and adverse events of the patients who were treated with ddTC for stage III and IV epithelial ovarian, tubal and peritoneal cancer from January 2012 to December 2018.

RESULTS

We analyzed 50 patients for frontline treatment and 11 patients for first platinum-sensitive relapse treatment, excluding those receiving maintenance therapy. Among the patients that received frontline ddTC treatment, RR was 82.9% for those in a neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) setting and 85.0% for those in an adjuvant setting. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 20 months after initial therapy. Among 31 cases that achieved remission by frontline surgery and the following ddTC, 22 had a platinum-sensitive relapse. RR of 11 patients treated with ddTC therapy alone for the first platinum-sensitive relapse was 81.8%, and the median PFS of these patients was 22 months after the first recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

ddTC therapy for advanced ovarian cancer achieved high response rates in all settings (NACT, adjuvant or platinum-sensitive relapse). ddTC therapy was effective for improving the prognosis of patients with stages III and IV of ovarian cancer.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy for primary advanced mismatch repair-deficient endometrial cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE

The addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), pembrolizumab or dostarlimab, to paclitaxel and carboplatin (TC) has shown better response rates and survival outcomes for patients with primary advanced mismatch repair-deficient (MMRd) endometrial cancer (EC) in NRG-GY018 and RUBY, respectively. Nonetheless, the high cost of ICIs remains a major concern when implementing this strategy in the real world. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab and dostarlimab with chemotherapy compared to TC for primary advanced MMRd EC.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model including 6600 patients with primary advanced MMRd EC to simulate treatment outcomes. The initial decision points in the model were treatment with pembrolizumab with TC (PEM-TC), dostarlimab with TC (DOS-TC), and TC. Model probabilities, costs, and health utility values were derived with assumptions from published literature. Effectiveness was determined as average quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

TC was the least costly strategy, whereas PEM-TC was the most effective strategy for primary advanced MMRd EC. TC was cost-effective based on a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000/QALY compared with PEM-TC (ICER, $377,718/QALY), and DOS-TC exhibited absolute dominance (ICER, $401,859/QALY). PEM-TC was cost-effective when the cost of pembrolizumab 200 mg was reduced to $4361 (61% reduction). PEM-TC was selected in 16.5% with a WTP threshold of $300,000/QALY, but in <1% with a WTP threshold range of $100,000-200,000/QALY.

CONCLUSION

PEM-TC can become cost-effective for primary advanced MMRd EC when the cost of pembrolizumab substantially decreases.

Impact of robotic surgery on patient flow and resource use intensity in ovarian cancer

There is an emerging focus on the role of robotic surgery in ovarian cancer. To date, the operational and cost implications of the procedure remain unknown. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the impact of integrating minimally invasive robotic surgery on patient flow, resource utilization, and hospital costs associated with the treatment of ovarian cancer during the in-hospital and post-discharge processes. 261 patients operated for the primary treatment of ovarian cancer between January 2006 and November 2014 at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital were included in this study. Outcomes were compared by surgical approach (robotic vs. open surgery) as well as pre- and post-implementation of the robotics platform for use in ovarian cancer. The in-hospital patient flow and number of emergency room visits within 3 months of surgery were evaluated using multi-state Markov models and generalized linear regression models, respectively. Robotic surgery cases were associated with lower rates of postoperative complications, resulted in a more expedited postoperative patient flow (e.g., shorter time in the recovery room, ICU, and inpatient ward), and were between $10,376 and $7,421 less expensive than the average laparotomy, depending on whether or not depreciation and amortization of the robotic platform were included. After discharge, patients who underwent robotic surgery were less likely to return to the ER (IRR 0.42, p = 0.02, and IRR 0.47, p = 0.055, in the univariate and multivariable models, respectively). With appropriate use of the technology, the addition of robotics to the medical armamentarium for the management of ovarian cancer, when clinically feasible, can bring about operational efficiencies and entails cost savings.

Weekly versus tri-weekly paclitaxel with carboplatin for first-line treatment in women with epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Epithelial ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer worldwide: 295,414 new cases were diagnosed in 2018, with 184,799 deaths. The lack of an effective screening strategy has led to the majority of women being diagnosed at an advanced stage. For these women, intravenous carboplatin combined with paclitaxel for six cycles is widely accepted as the standard first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer, in combination with debulking surgery. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the optimal dosing schedule of paclitaxel when combined with carboplatin in this setting.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of intravenous weekly paclitaxel with that of tri-weekly paclitaxel, in combination with intravenous carboplatin, as first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (defined as epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal and fallopian tube cancer).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for relevant studies up to 15 November 2021, using keywords and MeSH terms. We additionally handsearched conference libraries, online clinical trial databases and screened through lists of retrieved references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We Included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus tri-weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin, for treatment of newly-diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the hazard ratio (HR) to estimate the primary efficacy outcomes progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We used the risk ratio (RR) to estimate the primary toxicity outcome of severe neutropenia and secondary outcomes of quality of life (QoL) and treatment-related adverse events. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, using standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We included individual participant data (IPD) from one of the included studies, ICON-8, provided by the study team. We analysed data using a random-effects model in Review Manager 5.4 software. Additionally, we reconstructed IPD for PFS and OS data from published Kaplan-Meier curves from all studies and subsequently pooled these to analyse the two primary efficacy outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

From 2469 records, we identified four eligible RCTs with data for 3699 participants. All eligible studies were included in the main meta-analysis and reported on PFS and OS. There was likely a slight improvement in PFS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.98; 4 studies, 3699 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found little to no improvement in OS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.06; 4 studies, 3699 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was likely little to no difference in high-grade (grade 3 or 4) neutropenia when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43; 4 studies, 3639 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, weekly paclitaxel increased high-grade (grade 3 or 4) anaemia when compared to tri-weekly dosing (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.20; 4 studies, 3639 participants; high-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in high-grade neuropathy when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.94; 4 studies, 3639 participants; low-certainty evidence). The overall risk of detection bias and performance bias was low for OS, but was unclear for other outcomes, as treatments were not blinded. The risk of bias in other domains was low or unclear. We note that OS data were immature for three of the included studies (GOG-0262, ICON-8 and MITO-7).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin for first-line treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer likely improves PFS slightly (moderate-certainty evidence) but not OS (high-certainty evidence), compared to tri-weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin. However, this was associated with increased risk for high-grade anaemia, treatment discontinuation, dose delays and dose omissions (high- to low-certainty evidence). Our findings may not apply to women receiving bevacizumab in first-line therapy, those receiving treatment in the neo-adjuvant setting, or those with rare subtypes of clear cell or mucinous ovarian cancer.

Comparing Paclitaxel-Carboplatin with Paclitaxel-Cisplatin as the Front-Line Chemotherapy for Patients with FIGO IIIC Serous-Type Tubo-Ovarian Cancer

The use of weekly chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced-stage serous-type epithelial Tubo-ovarian cancer (ETOC), and primary peritoneal serous carcinoma (PPSC) is acceptable as the front-line postoperative chemotherapy after primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS). The main component of dose-dense chemotherapy is weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m²), but it would be interesting to know what is the difference between combination of triweekly cisplatin (20 mg/m²) or triweekly carboplatin (carboplatin area under the curve 5-7 mg/mL per min [AUC 5-7]) in the dose-dense paclitaxel regimen. Therefore, we compared the outcomes of women with Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC ETOC and PPSC treated with PCS and a subsequent combination of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and triweekly cisplatin (paclitaxel–cisplatin) or triweekly carboplatin using AUC 5 (paclitaxel–carboplatin). Between January 2010 and December 2016, 40 women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC EOC, FTC, or PPSC were enrolled, including 18 treated with paclitaxel–cisplatin and the remaining 22 treated with paclitaxel–carboplatin. There were no statistically significant differences in disease characteristics of patients between two groups. Outcomes in paclitaxel–cisplatin group seemed to be little better than those in paclitaxel–carboplatin (median progression-free survival [PFS] 30 versus 25 months as well as median overall survival [OS] 58.5 versus 55.0 months); however, neither reached a statistically significant difference. In terms of adverse events (AEs), patients in paclitaxel–carboplatin group had more AEs, with a higher risk of neutropenia and grade 3/4 neutropenia, and the need for a longer period to complete the front-line chemotherapy, and the latter was associated with worse outcome for patients. We found that a period between the first-time chemotherapy to the last dose (6 cycles) of chemotherapy >21 weeks was associated with a worse prognosis in patients compared to that ≤21 weeks, with hazard ratio (HR) of 81.24 for PFS and 9.57 for OS. As predicted, suboptimal debulking surgery (>1 cm) also contributed to a worse outcome than optimal debulking surgery (≤1 cm) with HR of 14.38 for PFS and 11.83 for OS. Based on the aforementioned findings, both regimens were feasible and effective, but maximal efforts should be made to achieve optimal debulking surgery and following the on-schedule administration of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel plus triweekly platinum compounds. Randomized trials validating the findings are warranted.

Reducing the pain: A cost-effectiveness analysis of transversus abdominis plane block using liposomal bupivacaine for outpatient laparoscopic ventral hernia repair

Background

Transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine has been studied as an effective method of reducing the need for postoperative opioids and increasing same-day discharge rates. However, less is known about the cost-effectiveness of this strategy relative to opioids alone for hernia repair. We performed an economic evaluation of these strategies using a computer simulation model.

Methods

A decision tree was constructed to determine cost-effectiveness as measured by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per quality-adjusted life-year. Base-case costs, quality-adjusted life-year values, and probabilities were derived from published studies and Medicare fee schedules. For input parameters for which we could not find values in the published literature, we used expert opinion. A 1-month time horizon was selected to focus on the immediate postoperative period. Finally, we performed 1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

The liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block was a dominant strategy yielding a $456.75 decrease in cost and an 0.1 increase in quality-adjusted life-years relative to opioids alone. In 1-way sensitivity analysis of cost incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, values were most sensitive to variations in the amount saved by same-day discharge and the cost of bupivacaine. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, transversus abdominis plane strategy was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year in 94.5% of iterations and at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year in 97.1% of iterations.

Conclusion

The use of liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block resulted in cost savings and improved quality-adjusted life-years in base-case analyses and was cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds in the majority of iterations in probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

•

A decision tree was constructed to determine cost-effectiveness as measured by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

•

The liposomal bupivacaine TAP block was a dominant strategy yielding a $456.75 decrease in cost and an 0.1 increase in QALYs relative to opioids alone.

•

In 1-way sensitivity analysis of cost, ICER values were most sensitive to variations in the amount saved by SDD and the cost of bupivacaine.

•

In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, TAP strategy was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY in 94.5% of iterations and pay threshold of $100,000/QALY in 97.1% of iterations.

Transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine compared to oral opioids alone for acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

To determine the cost-effectiveness of transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine (TAP) compared to oral opioids alone for acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer.

Methods

A cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision tree structure with a 30.5 day time-horizon was used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) values per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Base-case costs, probabilities, and QALY values were identified from recently published all-payer national database studies, 2017 Medicare fee-schedules, randomized trials, institutional case series, or assumed, when published values were not available. One-way, two-way and multiple probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

The TAP strategy dominated the oral opioid-only strategy, with decreased costs and increased effectiveness. Specifically, the TAP strategy saved $235.90 under the base-case assumptions. Threshold analyses demonstrated that if the relative same-day discharge probability was ≥ 12% higher in the TAP group, then TAP was cost-saving over oral opioids-alone. Similarly, TAP was cost-saving whenever the costs saved by same-day discharge compared to admission were ≥ $1115.22. Cost-effectiveness of the TAP strategy was highly robust of a variety of sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions

TAP with liposomal bupivacaine was robustly cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds. Further, TAP was cost-saving compared to opioids-only when the same-day discharge rate among TAP users was greater than among opioid-only users.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40661-017-0048-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.