Advanced breast cancer and its prevention by screening

ANLN and UBE2T are prognostic biomarkers associated with immune regulation in breast cancer: a bioinformatics analysis

OBJECTIVES

To screen and verify differential genes affecting the prognosis of breast cancer.

METHODS

Breast cancer gene expression datasets were downloaded from the GEO database, and original data were analyzed in R. The TIMER database was used to analyze the relationship between ANLN and UBE2T and immune cell infiltration.

RESULTS

Ten hub-key genes were identified, and survival analysis showed that UBE2T and ANLN were upregulated in breast cancer and their upregulation was associated with a poor prognosis. ANLN and UBE2T upregulation was associated with the prevalence of Th1 and Th2 cells, shifting the Th1/Th2 balance to Th2 in Basal and Luminal-B breast cancers, which indicates a poor prognosis (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

ANLN and UBE2T are potential biomarkers for predicting the prognosis of breast cancer.

Breast Cancer Screening: Characteristics and Results of the Italian Programmes in the Italian Group for Planning and Evaluating Breast Cancer Screening Programmes (GISMa)

In 1990, GISMa (Italian Group for planning and evaluating Mammographic Screening - Gruppo Italiano per la pianificazione e la valutazione dei programmi di Screening Mammografico), a working group of operators (radiographers, radiologists, epidemiologists, clinicians, surgeons) involved in screening programmes ongoing in Italy, was created within the Italian School of Senology. The aim of this study is to illustrate data, presented at the GISMa meeting held in April 1994, concerning the characteristics of each programme and some early indicators of effectiveness. To assess these parameters (concerning compliance level, recall rate, benign/malignant biopsy ratio, detection rate, stage distribution, nodal involvement and number of cancers with a diameter under 1 cm, rate of cancer, etc.), ‘acceptable’ and ‘desirable’ standards obtained from Italian and North-European cancer screening experiences have been adopted. Most programmes have shown an acceptable standard for most of the indicators, and many of them have attained desirable levels. In most screening programmes the occurrence of interval cancers has not yet been measured, but all centres have (or are working to set up) a systematic active procedure to collect the data. The results indicate that common guidelines can be adopted, even when working in very heterogeneous contexts, and that it is possible to achieve a very high effectiveness and efficacy level. As regards quality control and cost/benefit issues, the goal of extending centralised, population-based screening programmes to other Italian regions becomes a priority.

Comparison of costs and benefits of breast cancer screening with mammography, ultrasonography, and MRI

Screening mammography performed annually on all women beginning at age 40 years has reduced breast cancer deaths by 30% to 50%. The cost per year of life saved is well within the range for other commonly accepted medical interventions. Various studies have estimated that reduction in treatment costs through early screening detection may be 30% to 100% or more of the cost of screening. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening is also cost-effective for very high-risk women, such as BRCA carriers, and others at 20% or greater lifetime risk. Further studies are needed to determine whether MRI is cost-effective for those at moderately high (15%-20%) lifetime risk. Future technical advances could make MRI more cost-effective than it is today. Automated whole-breast ultrasonography will probably prove cost-effective as a supplement to mammography for women with dense breasts.

Cost-effectiveness of early detection of breast cancer in Catalonia (Spain)

Background

Breast cancer (BC) causes more deaths than any other cancer among women in Catalonia. Early detection has contributed to the observed decline in BC mortality. However, there is debate on the optimal screening strategy. We performed an economic evaluation of 20 screening strategies taking into account the cost over time of screening and subsequent medical costs, including diagnostic confirmation, initial treatment, follow-up and advanced care.

Methods

We used a probabilistic model to estimate the effect and costs over time of each scenario. The effect was measured as years of life (YL), quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and lives extended (LE). Costs of screening and treatment were obtained from the Early Detection Program and hospital databases of the IMAS-Hospital del Mar in Barcelona. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to compare the relative costs and outcomes of different scenarios.

Results

Strategies that start at ages 40 or 45 and end at 69 predominate when the effect is measured as YL or QALYs. Biennial strategies 50-69, 45-69 or annual 45-69, 40-69 and 40-74 were selected as cost-effective for both effect measures (YL or QALYs). The ICER increases considerably when moving from biennial to annual scenarios. Moving from no screening to biennial 50-69 years represented an ICER of 4,469€ per QALY.

Conclusions

A reduced number of screening strategies have been selected for consideration by researchers, decision makers and policy planners. Mathematical models are useful to assess the impact and costs of BC screening in a specific geographical area.

Population-based mammography screening results in substantial savings in treatment costs for fatal breast cancer

AIMS

The aim was to assess the effect of population-based mammography screening on treatment costs for fatal breast cancer in Turku, Finland.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 556 women with invasive breast cancer, diagnosed at the age of 40-74 years in 1987-1993: 427 in the screened group (screen-detected or interval cancer) and 129 in the unscreened group (not yet invited or refused screening). Both groups were followed up for 8 years from diagnosis.

RESULTS

In the unscreened group, 32 (25%) patients died of breast cancer versus 49 (12%) in the screened group (p < 0.001). The non-discounted mean treatment costs were 2.8-fold for those dying of breast cancer compared to survivors: 26,222 euros versus 9,434 euros; the difference between means was 16,788 euros (95% CI 14,915-18,660) (p<0.001). The mean costs for fatal cases were high, irrespective of the way cancer was detected: 23,800 euros in the unscreened group versus 27,803 euros in the screened group; the difference between means was -4,003 euros (-10,810 to 2802) (p=0.245). In the unscreened group, patients with fatal breast cancer accounted for 41% (0.76/1.87 million euros) of the total treatment costs versus 29% (1.36/4.76 million euros) in the screened group. It was estimated that about one third of costs for fatal breast cancer were avoided through mammography screening, accounting for 72-81% of the estimated total treatment cost savings achieved by screening. About 31-35% of the screening costs for 1987 to 1993 were offset by savings in treatment costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment costs for fatal breast cancer are high. Mammography screening results in substantial treatment cost savings, in which reduction of fatal disease is the key element.

Costs and effects of ultrasonography in the evaluation of palpable breast masses

OBJECTIVE

To study the costs and effects of incorporating ultrasonography in the triple assessment of palpable breast masses.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was designed to compare a conventional strategy of performing fine-needle aspiration cytology after clinical examination and mammography, with three different experimental strategies of preceding ultrasonography. Empirical data were used from a prospective study in 522 breasts in 492 patients with a palpable mass, including 93 malignancies. In strategy 1, cases with probably benign, suspect malignant, and malignant ultrasonography results were referred for fine-needle aspiration cytology; in strategy 2, benign cases were also referred for fine-needle aspiration cytology; and in strategy 3, ultrasonography was only performed in patients with benign results on clinical examination and mammography, whereas immediate fine-needle aspiration cytology was performed in patients with suspicious lesions. Outcome variables included the total costs and the expected number of life years. Sensitivity analysis was performed on all parameters in the model.

RESULTS

All strategies reported a similar life expectancy of 31.0 years. Cost-minimization demonstrated that experimental strategy 3 was the least expensive strategy (3013 Euro). Experimental strategy 2 was the most costly one (3512 Euro). Compared with the conventional strategy of immediate fine-needle aspiration cytology (3087 Euro), both ultrasonography strategies 1 and -3 were preferred.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating ultrasonography in the triple assessment of palpable breast masses can result in a reduction of the total costs for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer.

Clinical and economic issues in the treatment of advanced breast cancer with bisphosphonates

An ideal palliative therapy for bone metastases would successfully reduce skeletal complications in several thousands of breast cancer patients. Second- and third-generation bisphosphonates are effective in reducing the overall skeletal complication rate and the time to first skeletal complication. Nevertheless, not enough evidence supports their benefit on quality of life. Furthermore, bisphosphonates are expensive (up to 775 US dollars per month, 2002 value) and cost-effectiveness evaluations have been limited to pamidronate (pamidronic acid). In economic evaluations of pamidronate, resulting incremental dollar per quality-adjusted life year gained ranged from cost savings to 108,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year. The data were quite sensitive to quality-of-life estimates and country-specific cost values. Because of the wide range of the cost-effectiveness ratio, it is uncertain whether the universal prescription of bisphosphonates in this setting represents an efficient use of healthcare resources. Probably, country- and drug-specific policies might increase the efficiency of this treatment. Further outcomes research is required to assess these agents more fully.

Economic evaluation of aromatase inhibitors for the treatment of breast cancer

Breast cancer affects 1 million women a year. Hormonal therapy has been a mainstay of treatment for women with hormone-sensitive breast cancer. The newer class of aromatase inhibitors has challenged the use of the previous standard agent, tamoxifen, in the treatment and prevention of breast cancer. This article will provide a thorough review of the literature on the newer generation aromatase inhibitors and examine their role in metastatic, adjuvant, neoadjuvant and prevention settings. An in-depth review of the cost-efficiency analyses is also performed. Recent studies on the newer, third-generation aromatase inhibitors have challenged the previous gold standard (tamoxifen) in the prevention and management of hormone-sensitive breast cancer in postmenopausal women. These studies have supported the use of aromatase inhibitors as first-line therapy in both early (adjuvant) and advanced breast cancer management. Whether aromatase inhibitors should replace tamoxifen in these settings is still a matter of debate. Augmenting these studies and providing additional information to the debate are pharmacoeconomic appraisals, which help to place a societal value on newer therapies as compared with the previously established therapy. This review discusses the pharmacology and efficacy of the newer aromatase inhibitors as it applies to their role in the metastatic, adjuvant, neoadjuvant and prevention settings. The pharmacoeconomic studies performed on these agents are also discussed.

Mammographic screening: evidence from randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

All randomised breast cancer screening trials have shown a reduction in breast cancer mortality in the 'invited for mammography' screening arm compared with the 'control arm' for women aged 50 years and older at randomisation (overall 25%). However, individually published point estimates differ and concern has been raised about methodological quality and outcome measures. Materials and Methods Review of the evidence on breast cancer mortality reduction and discussion of the causes of difference in point estimates in the five Swedish and Canadian trials. A summary of the prerequisites for methodological quality and its available evidence from the trials is given. Data to support breast cancer mortality as a correct outcome measure are presented.

RESULTS

There is no reason not to use breast cancer mortality as an outcome measure for trials intended to reduce breast cancer mortality, both from a clinical and a methodological point of view. Everything possible was performed in these trials in order to determine this outcome measure as accurately as possible. The fact that a few of the trials showed a relatively large breast cancer mortality reduction and others far lower reduction rates is irrelevant, if one does not consider the background situation in the region before the trial started, the design of the trial or quality of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

There seems no reason to change or halt the current nation-wide population-based screening programmes. Nor is there any justifiable reason for negative reports towards women or professionals.

Initiation of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities and effect on breast-cancer mortality: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

More than a decade ago, a mammography screening programme for women aged 50-69 years was initiated in the Netherlands. Our aim was to assess the effect of this programme on breast-cancer mortality rates.

METHODS

We examined data for 27948 women who died of breast-cancer aged 55-74 years between 1980 and 1999 (30560 cases until 2001). We grouped individuals into 93 clusters, depending on where they lived, and analysed data by use of national population statistics. We analysed time trends in breast-cancer mortality, adjusting for gradual implementations at municipality level, taking as year 0 the month and year in which screening began in a particular municipality. We used a Poisson regression model to estimate the time at which the trend started to turn. We assessed indirectly whether this turning point was related to initiation of screening or adjuvant systemic therapy in four clusters defined according to when screening was implemented.

FINDINGS

Compared with rates in 1986-88, breast-cancer mortality rates in women aged 55-74 years fell significantly in 1997 and subsequent years as predicted, reaching -19.9% in 2001. Mortality rates had been increasing by an annual 0.3% until screening was introduced; thereafter we noted a decline of 1.7% per year (95% CI 2.39-0.96) in women aged 55-74 years and of 1.2% in those aged 45-54 (2.40 to 0.07). The turning point in mortality trends arose at around year 0. Adjuvant systemic therapy is unlikely to be the cause of this turning point, since the mortality rates continued to rise up to 1 year after implementation in municipalities where screening began after 1995.

INTERPRETATION

Routine mammography screening can reduce breast-cancer mortality rates in women aged 55-74 years.

Efficacy and economics of hormonal therapies for advanced breast cancer

Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality among postmenopausal women in the US, and the economic burden of breast cancer care comprises a large percentage of the healthcare budget. Hormonal therapies have a proven place in the management of advanced breast cancer. This type of therapy is more likely to be used in older, compared with younger, women, because tumours in older women are more likely to express estrogen and progesterone receptors. While it is difficult to measure the costs of cancer care because of variation in extent and duration of treatment, treatment-related costs including costs of hormonal agents used for advanced disease account for a relatively small component of the overall costs. Newer hormonal regimens such as the new third generation nonsteroidal (letrozole, anastrozole) and steroidal (exemestane) aromatase inhibitors have shown improved clinical efficacy compared with standard regimens such as megestrol and tamoxifen in the metastatic setting in terms of objective responses or time to tumour progression. In addition the newer agents have improved toxicity profiles. Cost analyses of the newer aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole), compared with megestrol, show an optimistic outlook for these agents. Additional work needs to be done looking at a comparison of the efficacy and costs of the aromatase inhibitors relative to the currently recommended hormonal treatments used for women with metastatic breast cancer.

Modelling the future costs of breast screening

The aim of this paper was to estimate the future breast cancer and non-breast cancer costs associated with breast screening. The Nottingham prognostic index (NPI) was used to stratify patients into different prognostic groups and to predict the impact of breast screening on future costs. A Markov model was used to estimate breast cancer and non-breast costs for each prognostic group. Breast cancer costs were found to increase as the severity of prognosis increases. The opposite pattern was found for non-breast cancer costs. The total future costs (breast cancer and non-breast cancer costs) for each prognostic group was between pound10000 and pound11000. As a percentage of the costs of screening, the savings in future breast cancer costs were 20.9%. Inclusion of non-breast cancer costs cancelled out any potential savings in future breast cancer cost resulting from a better prognosis and resulted in an increase of 5.7% in future costs. Whether to include the latter type of cost remains a methodological issue of debate in economic evaluation.

Development of WHO guidelines on generalized cost-effectiveness analysis

The growing use of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to evaluate specific interventions is dominated by studies of prospective new interventions compared with current practice. This type of analysis does not explicitly take a sectoral perspective in which the costs and effectiveness of all possible interventions are compared, in order to select the mix that maximizes health for a given set of resource constraints. WHO guidelines on generalized CEA propose the application of CEA to a wide range of interventions to provide general information on the relative costs and health benefits of different interventions in the absence of various highly local decision constraints. This general approach will contribute to judgements on whether interventions are highly cost-effective, highly cost-ineffective, or something in between. Generalized CEAs require the evaluation of a set of interventions with respect to the counterfactual of the null set of the related interventions, i.e. the natural history of disease. Such general perceptions of relative cost-effectiveness, which do not pertain to any specific decision-maker, can be a useful reference point for evaluating the directions for enhancing allocative efficiency in a variety of settings. The proposed framework allows the identification of current allocative inefficiencies as well as opportunities presented by new interventions.

Economic evaluation of letrozole in the treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women in Canada

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of initiation of second-line hormone therapy with letrozole in the treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women in Canada, compared to megestrol acetate.

METHODS

A modified Markov model, incorporating seven health states, was designed to simulate the treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer from second-line hormone therapy to death. The model was constructed with data from a clinical trial, literature sources, and interviews with breast cancer treatment experts. Canadian experts provided information on resource utilization patterns and local costs were attached to these resources. The model was used to calculate mean survival time, time without progression, and total direct medical costs for patients initiating treatment with letrozole 2.5 mg or megestrol acetate 160 mg.

RESULTS

The mean survival time and time without progression for letrozole 2.5 mg patients were 28.3 months and 19.0 months, respectively, compared to 25.7 months and 16.5 months for megestrol acetate 160 mg patients. Total treatment costs for both groups were similar with the letrozole 2.5 mg group costing dollar 20,068 per patient, dollar 1061 more than the megestrol acetate 160 mg group (dollar CAN, 1996). The cost-effectiveness ratio for letrozole 2.5 mg with respect to megestrol was dollar 5051 per year of life gained. Sensitivity analysis showed that this ratio was sensitive to variations in the probabilities governing disease progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced breast cancer patients initiating second-line hormone therapy with letrozole 2.5 mg have better clinical outcomes than patients receiving megestrol acetate 160 mg. Furthermore, this benefit comes at an acceptable cost to the Canadian health care system.

Breast cancer screening; cost-effective in practice?

The main aim of national breast screening is a reduction in breast cancer mortality. The data on the reduction in breast cancer mortality from three (of the five) Swedish trials in particular gave rise to the expectation that the Dutch programme of 2-yearly screening for women aged 50-70 would produce a 16% reduction in the total population. In all likelihood, many of the years of life gained as a result of screening are enjoyed in good health. According to its critics the actual benefit that can be achieved from the national breast cancer screening programmes is overstated. Considerable benefits have recently been demonstrated in England and Wales. However, the fall was so considerable in such a relatively short space of time that screening (started in 1987) was thought to only have played a small part. As far as the Dutch screening programme is concerned it is still too early to reach any conclusions about a possible reduction in mortality. The first short-term results of the screening are favourable and as good as (or better than) expectations. In Swedish regions where mammographic screening was introduced, a 19% reduction in breast cancer mortality can be estimated at population level, and recently a 20% reduction was presented in the UK. In countries where women are expected to make appointments for screening themselves, the attendance figures are significantly lower and the quality of the process as a whole is sometimes poorer. The benefits of breast cancer screening need to be carefully balanced against the burden to women and to the health care system. Mass breast screening requires many resources and will be a costly service. Cost-effectiveness of a breast cancer screening programme can be estimated using a computer model. Published cost-effectiveness ratios may differ tremendously, but are often the result of different types of calculation, time periods considered, including or excluding downstream cost. The approach of simulation and estimation is here the same for all countries. The effects of a breast-screening program depend on many factors, such as the epidemiology of the disease, the health care system, costs of health care, the quality of the screening programme and the attendance rate. The estimated CE-ratio ranges from 2650 euros per life-year gained in Navarra to 9650 in Germany. Although relatively low incidence levels expected, the CE-ratio in Navarra is most favourable probably due to a relatively unfavourable clinical stage distribution before screening and the increasing incidence. The UK has a screening situation that is almost similar with the Netherlands. Therefore, the CE-ratios of both countries are comparable. The differences between countries make it impossible to set up one uniform screening policy. The theoretical outcomes of the benefit that can be achieved are generally from small-scale trials involving a limited number of experts, persons examined, and areas. On a national scale, with hundreds of professional practitioners, it can be expected to be more difficult to attain uniform quality. Continuous quality control, monitoring and evaluation are therefore crucial.

Breast cancer screening

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women in the United States; however, recent data demonstrates a decline in the mortality rate, which may be attributed to early detection from screening programs combined with effective therapies for early stage disease. As a result of the prevalence of breast cancer and its association with highly emotional issues, screening recommendations have aroused debate in the scientific, public, and legislative domains. A general consensus supports breast cancer screening among women between the ages of 50 and 70; however, much controversy exists regarding screening for women age 40 to 49 or above age 70. This article explores the issues involved in determining breast cancer screening recommendations among asymptomatic women with average risk in the United States.

Cost effectiveness of letrozole in the treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women in the UK

OBJECTIVE

To simulate the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer from second-line hormone therapy to death, and to generate estimates of the cost and effectiveness of letrozole and megestrol in order to determine the incremental cost effectiveness of letrozole, expressed as cost per life-years gained.

DESIGN

A decision-analytic model, using Markov process techniques, was designed to evaluate the lifetime clinical and economic consequences of treatment with letrozole compared with standard care with megestrol. The model was based on clinical trial results showing a clear advantage of letrozole in terms of time to progression and duration of response.

SETTING

The setting of the study was that of the UK healthcare system in 1996.

PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS

A hypothetical cohort of patients, identical to the patients recruited for the AR/BC2 clinical trial, who were postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer who had previously failed to respond to first-line or adjuvant anti-estrogen therapy.

INTERVENTIONS

The dosages of medications were 2.5 and 160 mg/day for letrozole and megestrol, respectively. The analysis covered the period from treatment initiation until death (lifetime model). Effectiveness was expressed as survival and time without progression, and the model also included all relevant economic measures.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS

Based on the model, the average survival time of the letrozole group was 2.1 years (25.3 months) versus 1.9 years (21.5 months) for the megestrol group, a gain in survival of 2.4 months (10.5%). The average time without progression, cumulatively calculated over the different treatment options, amounted to 20.2 months for letrozole and 17.8 months for megestrol, an increase of 13.7% for the former patients. The total average cost per patient for the treatment of advanced breast cancer starting from second-line hormone therapy until death was higher in the letrozole group at 7547 Pounds versus 6820 Pounds for the megestrol group (discounted at an annual rate of 5%), leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 3588 Pounds per life-year gained (1996 values).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the assumptions used in this model, letrozole offers a suitable alternative to megestrol in the treatment of second-line hormone therapy.

Advanced prostate cancer: course, care, and cost implications

BACKGROUND

If prostate cancer screening proves to be effective, some cases will be prevented from reaching the advanced stage. In order to evaluate screening programs thoroughly, it is important to quantify course, care, and accompanying costs of advanced disease.

METHODS

We studied 70 files of patients in two hospitals, who had received a diagnosis of distant metastases of prostate cancer and who had died in the years 1994-1998. The total healthcare received by these patients, including symptoms and complaints, was recorded.

RESULTS

The most frequently reported symptoms were pain (42%), urogenital symptoms (25%), and malaise (20%). Eighty-nine percent of all patients were hormonally treated (either by orchidectomy and/or chemical castration), and 47% received one or more series of radiation therapy. Sixty-nine percent of all patients were treated with pain medication. The average duration of advanced disease in all patients was 24 months. Average costs of advanced disease were estimated at $11,182 over the total period: $1,547 (14%) was allocated to assessment and outpatient care, and $9,635 (86%) to treatment and costs of hospital stay. Almost half of the total costs were determined by hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

These data give a better understanding of the course, care, and costs of advanced prostate cancer. These estimates, together with the effects of advanced prostate cancer on quality of life, will be used for the evaluation of prostate cancer screening.

Third line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an evaluation of quality of life and cost

Many patients with metastatic breast cancer receive several types of chemotherapy, although it is recognized that there is a declining probability of response. A major problem confronts oncologists in deciding when to recommend to patients that no further chemotherapy should be given. To address this problem we have assessed prospectively, health-related quality of life (HRQL) and costs of health care for 35 patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving third line chemotherapy in a representative clinical situation. HRQL and utilities were measured longitudinally using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire and the time trade-off method. Patients received a median of 2 cycles of chemotherapy and lived a median of 4.3 months. Twelve patients (34%) had substantial (> 10 points) improvement in the Global QL subscale and more than 30% of patients had similar changes in emotional and social function. The median baseline utility score was 0.9 and utilities correlated poorly with HRQL subscale. Eighteen patients had measurable disease and one patients experienced a partial response. Grade 3/4 toxicity occurred in 30% of patients. The average cost of management from study entry to death was CDN$ 17,260 (approximately US$ 12,000). Sixteen percent of this cost was associated directly with chemotherapy while hospital admissions and outpatient visits accounted for 50% and 14% of the total cost respectively. We conclude that: (a) many patients receiving third line chemotherapy maintain or improve indices of HRQL despite short survival and a low response rate: this might be due to chemotherapy, placebo effect, or a shift in frame of reference for HRQL; (b) patients were unwilling to trade quantity for quality of life; and (c) response rates and survival may be overestimated in patients selected for clinical trials.

Effect of radiotherapy on the interpretation of routine follow-up mammography after conservative breast surgery: a randomized study

Radiotherapy after conservative surgery causes fat necrosis, fibrosis, skin thickening and other parenchymal distortion of the breast. The interpretation of a mammogram of the irradiated breast may therefore be difficult. We studied the effect of radiotherapy on the interpretation of the routine mammography used in the follow-up of breast cancer patients. A total of 144 low-risk breast cancer patients were randomized to radiotherapy or to no further treatment after conservative surgery. The first routine follow-up mammography was performed 18 months after surgery and every 18 months after that. The number of mammography examinations was estimated per patient and per follow-up year. The number of extra diagnostic tests and the occurrence of positive findings were assessed per mammography session and per follow-up year. Further diagnostic tests prompted by difficulties in interpreting the mammogram were performed to an extent of 0.19 per mammography examination in the radiotherapy group and of 0.15 in the non-radiotherapy group, i.e. 1.3 times more often. Findings that turned out to be negative at confirmation were 2.0 times (P< 0.05) more common in the radiotherapy group. These false-positive findings were more common in the radiotherapy group than in the surgery group and only shortly after treatment. Mammography is more difficult to interpret after radiotherapy than after conservative surgery alone, especially shortly after treatment, and more often involves extra diagnostic tests and findings that will be negative at confirmation.

Short-term effects of population-based screening for prostate cancer on health-related quality of life

BACKGROUND

Population-based screening for prostate cancer is currently being evaluated in randomized clinical trials in the United States and in Europe. Side effects arising from the process of screening and from the earlier treatment of screen-detected prostate cancer may be important factors in the evaluation. To examine health-related quality of life (or health status) among men screened for prostate cancer, we conducted a longitudinal study of 626 attenders to the Rotterdam (The Netherlands) prostate cancer screening program and of 500 nonparticipants.

METHODS

Attenders of the screening program and nonparticipants completed self-assessment questionnaires (SF-36 [i.e., Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey] and EQ-5D [i.e., EuroQol measure for health-related quality of life] health surveys) to measure generic health status, as well as an additional questionnaire for anxiety and items relating to prostate cancer screening.

RESULTS

Physical discomfort during digital rectal examination and during transrectal ultrasound was reported by 181 (37%) of 491 men and by 139 (29%) of 487 men, respectively; discomfort during prostate biopsy was reported by 64 (55%) of 116 men. Mean scores for health status and anxiety indicated that the participants did not experience relevant changes in physical, psychological, and social functioning during the screening procedure. However, high levels of anxiety were observed throughout the screening process among men with a high predisposition to anxiety. Similar scores for anxiety predisposition were observed among attenders and nonparticipants.

CONCLUSIONS

At the group level, we did not find evidence that prostate cancer screening induced important short-term health-status effects, despite the short-lasting side effects related to the biopsy procedure. However, subgroups may experience high levels of anxiety. The implication is that unfavorable health-status effects of prostate cancer screening occur mainly in the treatment phase.

The costs of treating breast cancer in the United Kingdom: implications for screening

Total treatment costs by stage at diagnosis are estimated for a sample of breast cancer patients. At 4 years, stage 4 cancers emerge as being more expensive to treat than those at earlier stages, although this difference fails to achieve significance when expected lifetime costs are considered. The inclusion of treatment cost estimates in a screening model indicates that screening may increase expected treatment costs by a marginal amount, although the model also suggests that the cost-effectiveness ratio of breast cancer screening might be better than had originally been thought.

Quantitative estimates of the impact of sensitivity and specificity in mammographic screening in Germany

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To estimate quantitatively the impact of the quality of mammographic screening (in terms of sensitivity and specificity) on the effects and costs of nationwide breast cancer screening.

DESIGN

Three plausible "quality" scenarios for a biennial breast cancer screening programme for women aged 50-69 in Germany were analysed in terms of costs and effects using the Microsimulation Screening Analysis model on breast cancer screening and the natural history of breast cancer. Firstly, sensitivity and specificity in the expected situation (or "baseline" scenario) were estimated from a model based analysis of empirical data from 35,000 screening examinations in two German pilot projects. In the second "high quality" scenario, these properties were based on the more favourable diagnostic results from breast cancer screening projects and the nationwide programme in The Netherlands. Thirdly, a worst case, "low quality" hypothetical scenario with a 25% lower sensitivity than that experienced in The Netherlands was analysed.

SETTING

The epidemiological and social situation in Germany in relation to mass screening for breast cancer.

RESULTS

In the "baseline" scenario, an 11% reduction in breast cancer mortality was expected in the total German female population, ie 2100 breast cancer deaths would be prevented per year. It was estimated that the "high quality" scenario, based on Dutch experience, would lead to the prevention of an additional 200 deaths per year and would also cut the number of false positive biopsy results by half. The cost per life year gained varied from Deutsche mark (DM) 15,000 on the "high quality" scenario to DM 21,000 in the "low quality" setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Up to 20% of the total costs of a screening programme can be spent on quality improvement in order to achieve a substantially higher reduction in mortality and reduce undesirable side effects while retaining the same cost effectiveness ratio as that estimated from the German data.

Age and interval for screening mammography: whom do you believe?

The purpose of this article is to help the clinician understand the benefits and limitations of screening mammography in the 40-49 age group. Since the benefit of screening mammography is well established in the literature for the 50-59 age group, comparison of the relevant issues is focused on similarities and differences between these two age groups. The incidence of breast cancer, the effectiveness of mammography, and the growth rates of tumors influence the benefit derived from screening. Available data suggest that mammography is equally effective in both age groups, with similar detection rates of minimal cancer (27 vs. 25%). The difference in estimated annual incidence between the 40-49 and the 50-59 age group is only 8%. Since tumor growth rate seems to be faster in the younger age group, screening should be performed annually, starting at 40 years of age, if it is to provide a benefit.

A new decision model for cost-utility comparisons of chemotherapy in recurrent metastatic breast cancer

In the absence of comparative clinical and pharmacoeconomic trial data for docetaxel versus paclitaxel as second-line therapy for patients with anthracycline-resistant metastatic breast cancer, a computer-based decision-analysis model was designed to evaluate the comparative utility to patients of these two taxoids. The model used the Markov process to analyse disease states (response, stable disease, progressive disease) and toxicities (acute, cumulative) for each treatment during the period from commencement of up to six 3-weekly cycles of chemotherapy, to death. A cost-utility analysis was carried out using the model, with a probability, a cost and a utility determined for each health state. Response rates were obtained from clinical trial data supplemented by expert clinical opinion. Costs were taken from UK national databases and published sources and the published UK prices of docetaxel and paclitaxel. Utilities for the various health states were established by use of standard gamble and visual analogue methods assessed by 30 oncology nurses in the UK who were acting as proxy patients. The results of the model showed that response rate is the key parameter determining the utility and cost utility of treatments for metastatic breast cancer. Although the total per-patient cost associated with docetaxel was marginally higher than that for paclitaxel (8233 pounds vs 8013 pounds), the higher response rate associated with docetaxel produced an improvement in utility to the patient at an incremental healthcare cost that is acceptable according to available defined limits. Sensitivity analyses revealed that, although the model was sensitive to changes in response rate and drug costs, the cost-utility ratio for docetaxel versus paclitaxel varied within acceptable limits in response to all likely changes in key parameters. In summary, in the base case used in this model, docetaxel produces a substantially larger utility benefit than paclitaxel, at a small additional cost per QALY gained (equivalent to 7 pounds per additional day of perfect health).

Potential for cost economies in guiding therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer

Therapeutic response in patients with advanced breast cancer is conventionally assessed with reference to criteria devised by the International Union Against Cancer. Evidence to date suggests, however, that assessments of equivalent quality may be obtained at lower cost from the use of serum markers. The paper presents estimates of potential cost savings resulting from the use of serum markers in place of conventional assessment and argues that the size of these savings merits the establishment of a randomised controlled trial.

Will early detection of breast cancer reduce the costs of treatment?

A substantial investment in resources is required to provide a population-based mammography screening program. At the same time, screening may also reduce the costs of treating breast cancer. Empirical evidence to support such cost savings, however, is limited. This paper presents a simulation of the impact on treatment costs of a population-based mammography screening program in New South Wales. A 1991 cohort of women aged 45 to 69 years is followed for the period 1991 to 2023. With two-yearly screening, the present value of the total health service costs for this cohort would be approximately $112 million. Primary treatment, at $60 million, would cost $5 million more with screening than without. Treatment for advanced stages of the disease would cost $22 million less. Overall, this analysis suggests that savings in treatment costs are relatively small in relation to the overall resource requirements of organised screening.

Changes in use of breast-conserving therapy in years 1978-2000

The treatment of breast cancer patients has changed rapidly in the past decade, but empirical data at local and national level are scarce. Predicting the consequences of screening for primary treatment is consequently difficult. The aim of this analysis of records on admissions to hospital of women with breast cancer and/or for breast surgery (1975-90) together with a survey of all Dutch radiotherapy departments (1986-88) is to show the change in breast-conserving therapy and other primary treatment before the start of breast cancer screening in The Netherlands. There was a modest increase in breast-conserving therapy after 1981, coinciding with the first publication on its trial, followed by a sharp increase between 1985 and 1990, after the second publication. At the end of that 5 year period, 36% of all women with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer underwent this type of surgery. Breast-conserving surgery is always followed by radiotherapy, but there has been a clear reduction in post-operative radiation after mastectomy. The percentage of breast-conserving therapy is at present higher in The Netherlands than in the USA. Implementing the Dutch screening programme will result in a maximum increase in breast-conserving therapy at national level of 34%, which stabilises at +21%, or a 50% maximum increase at local level. The number of women treated by mastectomy will ultimately decrease by 9%. Given the rapidity of change towards the use of breast-conserving surgery, which is enhanced by screening, recent information will be needed in predicting capacity and assessing whether screen-detected women are treated adequately.

Cost-effective use of autologous bone marrow transplantation: few answers, many questions, and suggestions for future assessments

High dose chemotherapy with the support of autologous bone marrow transplantation (ABMT) or peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) has been increasingly used in a variety of haematological and epithelial cancers over the last decade. The rationale of this approach is to overcome the chemotherapy resistance of tumour cells by increasing the dose of cytotoxic drugs. However, the clinical benefit of dose-intensification has been difficult to prove. Almost all studies of ABMT have been done without randomised comparisons with the standard form of therapy for a specific condition. From an economic perspective, the cost of ABMT has been steadily decreasing with improvements in supportive care primarily. Still, current ABMT cost estimates range from $US70 000 to $US150 000 for each uncomplicated procedure. Despite the lack of compelling evidence in support of dose-intensification, ABMT has become a default standard of care after relapse for many patients with lymphoma or leukaemia. We used a decision analysis model to estimate the cost effectiveness of the timing of ABMT in relapsed Hodgkin's disease. The model illustrates the difficulty of using available clinical trial data when follow-up of promising early reports is not available. The model showed that in most situations the optimal strategy is ABMT in second relapse despite growing consensus that immediate ABMT is the treatment of choice. ABMT for women with high-risk or early metastatic breast cancer is one of the most controversial areas in clinical oncology. In the US, several ongoing major randomised trials are addressing the role of ABMT in breast cancer. Using a Markov process we found that ABMT is the preferred strategy under almost all assumptions. The size of the benefit and cost effectiveness of ABMT varied markedly depending on the assumptions made. The model does not supplant the need for randomised trials that concurrently measure efficacy, quality of life, and resource utilisation. However, such analyses point out the critical areas where costs could be cut substantially without effecting efficacy. Drawing conclusions about the cost effectiveness of ABMT for all conditions is hampered by the lack of randomised comparisons of efficacy. Concurrent economic appraisals of selected phase III comparative trials should be considered since the supportive care costs associated with ABMT appear to be stabilising. However, the most important point is that randomised trials are the only mechanism for estimating the therapeutic effect of high dose chemotherapy.

Regional trends in breast cancer incidence and mortality in Denmark prior to mammographic screening

To provide a basis for the evaluation of mammographic screening programmes in Denmark, a study was undertaken of the regional differences in breast cancer incidence and mortality. All 16 regions were followed for the 20 year period, 1970-89, before the start of the first population-based mammographic screening programme in the Copenhagen municipality in 1991. Multiplicative Poisson models were used for the analysis. In general, the incidence increased during this period from 55 to 70 [per 100,000 standardised world standard population (WSP)], and the analysis shows this to be most pronounced among women below age 60. The mortality was more stable, changing only from 24 to 28 (per 100,000 standardised WSP), but a significant increase occurred in the late 1980s. The study showed regional differences in both incidence and mortality of breast cancer in Denmark. Both the incidence and the mortality varied between the regions, with maximum differences of 22%. The analysis showed no variation in the time trends in the different regions, and thus indicates that the use of a regional comparison group would be a valid basis for evaluation of the Copenhagen programme. Our study, however, underlies the difficulties inherent in the evaluation of screening programmes without internal control groups.

Systemic therapy in breast cancer: efficacy and cost utility

Cancer treatment accounts for a large proportion of healthcare costs. Often, new treatment modalities provide benefits, but at high costs. The impression that cancer treatment is expensive is enhanced by publicity surrounding treatments like bone marrow transplantation. There is a need to evaluate costs of different treatment approaches and to address the cost utility of cancer treatment in general compared with therapies for other conditions. Breast cancer can serve as a good model for economic evaluation of cancer treatment because of the broad range of treatment options and objectives it encompasses, and also because well defined benefits can be achieved. The cost utility of contemporary adjuvant therapy strategies, specifically chemotherapy in premenopausal women and hormonal treatment in estrogen-receptor (ER) positive pre- as well as postmenopausal women, seems favourable. Cost-utility ratios {cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained} range from $US4000 to $US10 000. However, hormonal treatment in ER-negative women may be associated with cost-per-QALY ratios of $US50 000 to $US200 000. So far there are no published cost-utility analyses of neo-adjuvant therapy or adjuvant bone marrow transplantation as the long term effects of these treatment options are undefined. Few data exist on cost utilities of systemic drug treatment in advanced breast cancer, although drugs may account for only a moderate part of the total treatment and caring costs. Bone marrow transplantation in patients with metastatic breast cancer costs about $US100 000 per QALY, which is expensive.

Current and future costs of cancer

Cancer costs in the Netherlands amounted to 4.8% of health care costs in 1988. For five cancer types, and a sixth group covering all other malignancies, costs were broken down by age, sex and disease phase. They showed a remarkably similar pattern of medical consumption. Costs were linked to observed incidence, mortality and estimated prevalence, together allowing for prediction of future costs of cancer. In 2020, as a result of ageing, cancer costs will have increased much more rapidly than total health care costs, in particular for cancer of the lung and prostate. Colorectal cancer costs were predicted for epidemiological scenarios. Our model shows that an increase in future prevalence may bear quite different cost implications. If it is due to higher incidence, the costs will increase substantially. If due to survival improvement, the increase will be less prominent. Simply extrapolating costs based on future prevalence or mortality may produce serious errors.

Tamoxifen: a review of pharmacoeconomic and quality-of-life considerations for its use as adjuvant therapy in women with breast cancer

Extensive clinical experience, summarised in the recent overview of the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), have confirmed that tamoxifen reduces the rate of both disease recurrence and mortality when administered as adjuvant therapy in women with early breast cancer. Tamoxifen is now established as the preferred adjuvant agent in postmenopausal women; in particular, patients with node-positive, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer have the most to gain from tamoxifen therapy. Data from a decision-analysis model indicated that tamoxifen monotherapy had a cost-utility ration {$US6000 per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), in 1989 dollars} 5 to 6 times lower than that cited as the cost-acceptability cut-off point in the US. While tamoxifen monotherapy is effective in postmenopausal women, the EBCTCG overview findings indicate that a combined regimen of tamoxifen and antineoplastic chemotherapy has superior efficacy in the same patient group. An issue of current interest is whether the added benefit offered by such a regimen can be justified in terms of added toxicity and cost. Data from a decision-analysis model indicate that combined therapy has a high incremental cost-utility ratio ($US58 000 per additional QALY, in 1989 dollars) compared with no therapy in postmenopausal women. However, the quality-of-life measures TWiST (Time Without Symptoms and Toxicity) and Q-TWiST (quality-adjusted TWiST) indicate that the early toxicity associated with a combined regimen appears to be justified given the superior long term benefits. Patient preference data from 1 study further indicate that the degree of benefit offered by a combined regimen would be acceptable to the majority (73%) of patients. Other areas where pharmacoeconomic analyses may help define more closely the optimal use of adjuvant tamoxifen is in patients at low risk of developing metastatic disease and in determining the optimal duration of therapy. Both areas require further clinical data. In conclusion, tamoxifen adjuvant monotherapy has a low cost-utility ratio in postmenopausal women with node-positive, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Combined therapy in the same patient group has a high cost-utility ratio compared with no therapy but quality-of-life and patient preference data suggest that the costs may be justified. Firm conclusions relating to the use of the drug in other patient subgroups and the optimal duration of therapy await further research.

Advanced breast cancer: use of resources and cost implications

Little information is currently available on the use of hospital resources and the resulting costs of treating any advanced cancer. Such data may be useful for planning purposes and for calculating the cost effectiveness of measures designed to reduce the incidence of advanced disease (such as the National Breast Screening Programme). A retrospective analysis of the medical records of 50 patients with advanced breast cancer who attended the Guy's Hospital Oncology Unit and who died between October 1988 and December 1990 has therefore been undertaken. For each patient, the duration of in-patient stays and principal indications for admissions were recorded, together with the number of out-patient attendances. Details of endocrine treatment, chemotherapy and radiotherapy were abstracted as were all radiological and laboratory investigations. Costs for each of these activities were calculated. The median duration of advanced disease was 17 months (mean 27 months; range 7 days-12 years). The mean cost of treatment per patients was calculated to be 7,620 pounds (range 317 pounds-27,860 pounds). Mean duration of in-patient stay was 32 days (0-133) and this accounted for 56% of total costs. The large majority (> 80%) of the time spent as an in-patient was for the care of serious illness rather than for specific antitumour treatment. Cytotoxic drugs accounted for 9% of the total cost, compared with 8% for radiotherapy and 13% for laboratory and radiological investigations.

How cost-effective is breast cancer screening in different EC countries?

Should the decision to start breast cancer screening in the Netherlands and in the U.K. be followed by other EC countries? This question has been addressed in an exploratory analysis of the differences in cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening in Spain, France, the U.K. and the Netherlands. A detailed cost-effectiveness analysis of breast cancer screening in the Netherlands has been used as the starting point. Country specific data on incidence, mortality, demography, screening organisation and price levels in health care have been used to predict the costs and effects of nationwide screening programmes, in which women aged 50-70 are invited for 2-yearly mammographic screening. The relative effect of screening is highest in the U.K. (16.55 life-years gained per 1000 screens) and lowest in Spain (8.23 life-years gained per 1000 screens). The cost per screen is highest in Spain (38 pounds) and lowest in the U.K. (18 pounds). In comparison with the yearly health expenditures per capita, the cost per life-year gained is 2.8 times higher in the Netherlands, 3.1 times higher in the U.K., 6.5 times higher in France and 20.6 times higher in Spain. These marked differences show that no uniform policy recommendations for breast cancer screening can be made for all countries of the EC.

Costs of home care for advanced breast and cervical cancer in relation to cost-effectiveness of screening

The costs of home care in the Netherlands are estimated for women with advanced breast and cervical cancer. We observe a growing role of intensive home care for the terminally ill patients. The average costs of home care are dfl 8,500 per patient for breast cancer patients and dfl 7,200 for cervical cancer patients. More than half of these costs are incurred in the last month before death. The level of home care in the preceding months is quite modest (dfl 120 per month for both diseases), not taking into account informal care. The costs of home care for patients with advanced cancer are only slightly related to the site of the primary tumor from which the metastases originate. Total average costs per patient during advanced disease, including hospital and nursing home care, amount to dfl 42,700 for breast cancer and dfl 29,000 for cervical cancer. This difference in costs is largely attributable to the longer duration of advanced disease for breast cancer, which substantially affects hospital costs. The high costs of care to patients with advanced cancer contribute to a favourable cost-effectiveness ratio of those screening programmes which reduce mortality and consequently the costs of care to advanced cancer patients.