Cost-effectiveness analysis of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test in node-positive early breast cancer

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® Test from a US Societal Perspective

Background and Objectives

The 21-gene assay (the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® test) estimates the 10-year risk of distant recurrence in hormone receptor positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions. The cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene assay compared against standard clinical-pathological risk tools alone for HR+/HER2- early-stage breast cancer was assessed using an economic model informed by evidence from randomized controlled trials.

Materials and Methods

A cost-effectiveness model consisted of a decision-tree to stratify patients according to their Recurrence Score (RS) results and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy, followed by a Markov component to estimate the long-term costs and outcomes of the chosen treatment. Distributions of patients and distant recurrence probabilities were derived from the TAILORx (N0) and RxPONDER (N1) trials. The model was evaluated from a healthcare payer and societal perspective. Endocrine therapy and chemotherapy use were informed using clinical expert opinion to reflect US clinical practice and were combined with Medicare drug costs (2021) to estimate the cost of treatment. Societal costs included lost productivity and patient out-of-pocket costs obtained from literature.

Results

The Oncotype DX test generated more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (N0: 0.25; N1: 0.08) at a lower cost (N0: -$13,395; N1: -$2526) compared to clinical-pathological risk alone from a societal cost perspective. The overall conclusions from the model did not change when considering a payer perspective. The main cost drivers were avoidance of distant recurrence for N0 (-$12,578), and the cost of adjuvant chemotherapy for N1 (-$2133). Lost productivity had a major impact in the societal perspective analysis (N0: -$4607; N1: -$1586).

Conclusion

Adjuvant chemotherapy decisions based on the RS result led to more life year gains and lower healthcare costs (dominant) compared to using clinical-pathological risk factors alone among patients with HR+/HER2- N0 and N1 early-stage breast cancer.

Should the Breast Cancer Staging System be Revised?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether breast cancer patients at stage T2N0 with tumor size ≥4 cm and <4 cm.

METHOD

Patients with T2N0 stage breast cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2019 were analyzed in 2 groups as <4 cm (T2a) and ≥4 cm (T2b) in the study using the SEER 17 Research Plus database. The patients' clinicopathological characteristics and oncological outcomes were included. Group comparisons of prognostic factors, overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were made.

RESULTS

In this study, which involved 70971 patients, the T2a group had higher 5-year OS rate (87.2 ± .2 vs 80.8 ± .5%) and 5-year CSS rate (93.7 ± .1% vs 89.4 ± .4%) than the T2b group (P < .001). Univariate analysis revealed that the overall risk of death was 1.5 times higher in T2b than T2a (HR: 1.533 [95% CI: 1.450-1.622], P < .001), whereas multivariate analysis demonstrated the risk was 1.4 times higher (HR: 1.384 [95% CI: 1.307-1.466], P < .001). The risk of cancer-specific death was 1.7 times higher in univariate analysis (HR: 1.691 [95% CI: 1.561-1.832], P < .001) and 1.4 times higher in multivariate analysis (HR: 1.420 [95% CI: 1.309-1.541], P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Overall survival and BCSS rates in stage T2b breast cancer patients are significantly lower than in T2a patients. Tumor size ≥4 cm in breast cancer is a negative predictor of prognosis.

The role of modern parameters and their relationship with recurrence risk as assessed by Oncotype DX: real-world evidence

Genomic analysis through various platforms is an essential tool for determining prognosis and treatment in a significant subgroup of early-stage breast cancer patients with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative status. Additionally, combined clinical and pathological characteristics can accurately predict the recurrence score (RS), as demonstrated by the University of Tennessee risk nomogram. In this study, we aimed to identify classical clinical-pathological factors associated with high RS in a local population, including modern parameters such as current abemaciclib treatment recommendations, HER2-low status, different Ki-67 cutoff values, and samples obtained from secondary primary tumours. This is a retrospective single-institution study that analysed a total of 215 tumour samples. Among lymph node-negative patients (n = 179), age, Ki67 values, and progesterone receptor status predicted RS after multivariate analysis. HER2-low status was not associated with RS differences (p = 0.41). Among lymph node-positive patients (n = 36), MonarchE inclusion criteria (15) were not associated with a higher RS (p = 0.61), and HER2-low did not reach statistical significance. However, tumours classified as secondary primaries numerically exhibited a higher RS. Based on these findings from our real-world sample, the mere application of clinical and pathological parameters is insufficient to predict RS outcomes. Modern parameters such as HER2-low status or adjuvant abemaciclib recommendations were not associated with RS differences. Regarding the observation of secondary tumours, more evidence is needed to understand whether prior hormone therapy exposure impacts the biological risk of secondary primary tumours.

A cost-consequence model of using the 21-gene assay to identify patients with early-stage node-positive breast cancer who benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Patients with early-stage hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) negative invasive breast cancer with 1-3 positive lymph nodes (N1) often undergo surgical excisions followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT). Many patients have no benefit from ACT and receive unnecessary, costly treatment often associated with short- and long-term adverse events (AEs). Gene expression profiling (GEP) assays, such as the 21-gene assay (i.e. the Oncotype DX assay), can identify patients at higher risk for recurrence who may benefit from ACT. However, the budgetary consequence of using the Oncotype DX assay versus no GEP testing in the Netherlands is unknown. Our study therefore assessed it using a cost-consequence model.

METHODS

A validated model was used to create the N1 model. The model compared the costs and consequences of using the Oncotype DX assay versus no GEP testing and MammaPrint, and subsequent ACT use with corresponding costs for chemotherapy, treatment of AEs, productivity losses, GEP testing, and treatment of recurrences, according to the Oncotype DX results. The model time horizon was 5 years.

RESULTS

Costs for the total population amounted to €8.0 million (M), €16.2 M, and €9.5 M, and cost per patient amounted to €13,540, €27,455, and €16,154 for using the Oncotype DX assay, no GEP testing, and MammaPrint, respectively. Total cost savings of using the Oncotype DX assay amounted to €8.2 M versus no GEP testing and €1.5 M versus MammaPrint. Using the Oncotype DX assay would result in fewer patients receiving ACT and thus fewer AEs, sick days, and hospitalizations, leading to overall cost savings compared with no GEP testing and MammaPrint.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing Oncotype DX testing in this population can prevent unnecessary overtreatment, reducing clinical and economic burden on the patient and Dutch healthcare system.

The Role of Nodes and Nodal Assessment in Diagnosis, Treatment and Prediction in ER+, Node-Positive Breast Cancer

The majority of breast cancers are oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+). In ER+ cancers, oestrogen acts as a disease driver, so these tumours are likely to be susceptible to endocrine therapy (ET). ET works by blocking the hormone's synthesis or effect. A significant number of patients diagnosed with breast cancer will have the spread of tumour cells into regional lymph nodes either at the time of diagnosis, or as a recurrence some years later. Patients with node-positive disease have a poorer prognosis and can respond less well to ET. The nodal metastases may be genomically similar or, as is becoming more evident, may differ from the primary tumour. However, nodal metastatic disease is often not assessed, and treatment decisions are almost always based on biomarkers evaluated in the primary tumour. This review will summarise the evidence in the field on ER+, node-positive breast cancer, including diagnosis, treatment, prognosis and predictive tools.

Genomic signature to guide adjuvant chemotherapy treatment decisions for early breast cancer patients in France: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Introduction

Chemotherapy (CT) is commonly used as an adjuvant treatment for women with early breast cancer (BC). However, not all patients benefit from CT, while all are exposed to its short- and long-term toxicity. The Oncotype DX^® test assesses cancer-related gene expression to estimate the risk of BC recurrence and predict the benefit of chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to estimate, from the French National Health Insurance (NHI) perspective, the cost-effectiveness of the Oncotype DX^® test compared to standard of care (SoC; involving clinicopathological risk assessment only) among women with early, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative BC considered at high clinicopathological risk of recurrence.

Methods

Clinical outcomes and costs were estimated over a lifetime horizon based on a two-component model that comprised a short-term decision tree representing the adjuvant treatment choice guided by the therapeutic decision support strategy (Oncotype DX^® test or SoC) and a Markov model to capture long-term outcomes.

Results

In the base case, the Oncotype DX^® test reduced CT use by 55.2% and resulted in 0.337 incremental quality-adjusted life-years gained and cost savings of €3,412 per patient, compared with SoC. Being more effective and less costly than SoC, Oncotype DX^® testing was the dominant strategy.

Discussion

Widespread implementation of Oncotype DX^® testing would improve patient care, provide equitable access to more personalized medicine, and bring cost savings to the health system.

Leveraging transcriptomics for precision diagnosis: Lessons learned from cancer and sepsis

Diagnostics require precision and predictive ability to be clinically useful. Integration of multi-omic with clinical data is crucial to our understanding of disease pathogenesis and diagnosis. However, interpretation of overwhelming amounts of information at the individual level requires sophisticated computational tools for extraction of clinically meaningful outputs. Moreover, evolution of technical and analytical methods often outpaces standardisation strategies. RNA is the most dynamic component of all -omics technologies carrying an abundance of regulatory information that is least harnessed for use in clinical diagnostics. Gene expression-based tests capture genetic and non-genetic heterogeneity and have been implemented in certain diseases. For example patients with early breast cancer are spared toxic unnecessary treatments with scores based on the expression of a set of genes (e.g., Oncotype DX). The ability of transcriptomics to portray the transcriptional status at a moment in time has also been used in diagnosis of dynamic diseases such as sepsis. Gene expression profiles identify endotypes in sepsis patients with prognostic value and a potential to discriminate between viral and bacterial infection. The application of transcriptomics for patient stratification in clinical environments and clinical trials thus holds promise. In this review, we discuss the current clinical application in the fields of cancer and infection. We use these paradigms to highlight the impediments in identifying useful diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers and propose approaches to overcome them and aid efforts towards clinical implementation.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy De-Escalation with Genomic Assay Protocol in Patients with Early Breast Cancer: A Single-Centre Prospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Genomic assays are useful tools for tailoring adjuvant treatment in early breast cancer. We aimed to analyse the role of an institutional protocol of a genomic assay for chemotherapy de-escalation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective cohort study of all consecutive women diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer, tested with the 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) assay from August 2015 to July 2018 at a Portuguese cancer centre. For being tested, patients should meet at least one of the pre-defined inclusion criteria: i) luminal A-like, pT2pN0; ii) luminal A-like, 1 - 3 positive nodes and comorbidities with higher risk of chemotherapy-induced toxicity; iii) pT1-2pN0, progesterone receptor ≤ 20% and/or Ki67 14% - 40%. Adjuvant treatment was de-escalated to isolated endocrine therapy if RS was less than 18. We measured the reduction in chemotherapy prescribing and its clinical impact, the RS association with pathologic features, and the protocol feasibility.

RESULTS

We tested 154 women with a median age of 61 years old (range: 25 - 79), 69% postmenopausal. Tumours were mainly pT1 (55%), pN0 (82%), invasive ductal (73%), G2 (86%), luminal B-like (69%) and stage IA (85%). We obtained a RS less than 18 in 60% of women, with an overall adjuvant chemotherapy reduction of 65%. Seven (95% confidence interval: 5 - 10) patients needed to be screened with the 21-gene RS assay to prevent one clinically relevant adverse event during the first six months of adjuvant treatment. Considering the currently used RS cut-off, only 9% of node-negative and 11% of node-positive patients had RS over 25. We found no relevant associations between RS and pathologic features. The protocol was feasible and did not compromise the adequate timing for adjuvant treatment.

CONCLUSION

These criteria allowed the de-escalation of adjuvant systemic treatment in at least six out of ten women.

The budget impact of utilizing the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test from a US healthcare payer perspective

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test is used to estimate distant recurrence risk of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer and inform decisions on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. A model-based budget impact analysis compared the Oncotype DX test in combination with clinical-pathological risk against using clinical-pathological risk alone for HR+/HER2- node-negative (N0) and node-positive (N1; 1-3 axillary lymph nodes) early-stage breast cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Test and medical costs associated with treatment of breast cancer were assessed through a US healthcare payer perspective. Distributions of patients by Recurrence Score result and distant recurrence probabilities with chemo-endocrine and endocrine therapy were derived from the TAILORx (N0) and RxPONDER (N1) trials. Changes in budget impact were evaluated over a 5-year horizon for a 1,000,000-member hypothetical health plan.

RESULTS

With the Oncotype DX test, there was an incremental budget impact of $261,067 (per member per month (PMPM): $0.004), in the N0 population, and $56,143 (PMPM: $0.001) in the N1 population over the 5-year period. The largest budget impact reduction in the N0 population was attributed to reduced breast cancer recurrence costs (incremental: -$633,457, PMPM: -$0.011), while chemotherapy sparing reduced costs in the N1 population (incremental: -$94,884, PMPM: -$0.002).

CONCLUSION

The clinical benefit of using the Oncotype DX test to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions has been shown in multiple randomized controlled trials. This analysis demonstrated that while using the Oncotype DX test to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions may slightly increase US healthcare costs over an initial 5-year time horizon (driven by a cost increase in the first year with cost savings reflected in remaining 4 years), there is significant scope for cost savings when assessing beyond this period due to avoided downstream costs of distant recurrence and long-term chemotherapy adverse events. PMPM costs also remain low across all populations examined, demonstrating a close-to-neutral budget impact.