Economic evaluation of targeted cancer interventions: critical review and recommendations

Osteoporosis Associated with Breast Cancer Treatments Based on Types of Hormonal Therapy: A Cross-Sectional Study Using Korean National Sample Data

Background and Objectives: This study aimed to investigate osteoporosis-related treatments and the overall anticancer drug treatment tendencies, with a focus on selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and aromatase inhibitors (AIs), in Korean patients with breast cancer from 2010 to 2019. Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. Patients with breast cancer (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision code: C50) as a principal diagnosis at least once from 2010 to 2019 were included. Those with osteoporosis (M80, M81, or M82) as a principal or sub-diagnosis or those who received osteoporosis treatment at least once were categorized as the osteoporosis-related treatment group, and others as the non-osteoporosis-related treatment group. The trends of drug prescriptions and treatment costs in patient groups were evaluated using descriptive statistics. Results: Among all included patients, those aged 45-54 years (40.20%) without osteoporosis treatment and those aged 55-64 years (34.11%) with osteoporosis treatment were the most common. SERM was the most commonly prescribed anticancer drug (29.20%) in the entire patient group, followed by AIs (20.83%). Patients without osteoporosis treatment had the highest prescription rate of SERM (31.48%), and those with osteoporosis treatment had a higher prescription rate of AIs (34.28%). Additionally, SERM and AIs were prescribed most frequently before and after the age of 55 years, respectively, regardless of the presence of treatment. Conclusions: This study found that osteoporosis-related treatment and patient age were associated with anticancer drug prescriptions. The present findings would help clinicians and researchers in the clinical diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer.

Social Inequalities in Use of Preventive Dental and Medical Services among Adults in European Countries

This study examined inequalities in dental check-ups and medical screenings using subjective and objective socioeconomic indicators. Data from 23,464 adults, aged 20 years old and over, who participated in a multi-national survey across Europe (Eurobarometer 72.3) were analysed. Participants’ socioeconomic position (SEP) was measured by education, difficulty in paying bills and subjective social status. Use of preventive services was measured by attendance for dental check-ups, cancer and cardiovascular screenings in the past 12 months. Socioeconomic inequalities were assessed in two-level logistic regression (adults nested within countries), adjusting for demographic factors and type of healthcare system. There were apparent social inequalities in using all three preventive services. However, only dental check-ups showed consistent and significant inequalities across all socioeconomic indicators with those in the bottom groups in education (odds ratio: 0.51; 95% confidence interval: 0.46–0.55), difficulty in paying bills (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.59–0.72) and subjective social status (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.57–0.69) having lower odds of reporting dental check-ups in the past 12 months than those in the top groups. Cancer screening was not associated with difficulty in paying bills whereas cardiovascular disease screening was not associated with education and subjective social status. Despite the availability of universal health coverage, there were clear social gradients in using preventive services particularly across education and subjective social status groups. The stronger and more consistent gradients observed in dental check-ups compared to cancer and cardiovascular screening could be attributed to difference in the level of coverage of dental and medical services in Europe.

Cost Analysis of Noninvasive Blood-Based MicroRNA Testing Versus CT Scans for Follow-up in Patients With Testicular Germ-Cell Tumors

BACKGROUND

Our group has developed a noninvasive blood-based microRNA (miRNA) test for improving diagnosis, disease monitoring, and relapse detection in malignant testicular germ-cell tumors (TGCTs). Performance analysis suggests the test is likely to have comparable sensitivity and specificity in detecting TGCT as computed tomography (CT), thus reducing the need for serial CT scans for follow-up monitoring, with associated reductions in cumulative radiation burden and second cancer risk. To facilitate clinical adoption, we undertook a cost analysis to identify the budget impact of replacing CT scans with miRNA testing within health care systems.

METHODS

The TGCT aftercare pathway was mapped out using National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. A Markov model was built to simulate the impact of the miRNA test on TGCT aftercare costs. Incidence, treatment probabilities, relapse rate, and death rate data were collected from published studies to populate the model.

RESULTS

Applying our model to the US health care system, the miRNA test has the potential to save up to $69 million per year in aftercare expenses related to TGCT treatment, with exact savings depending on the adoption rate and test price.

CONCLUSION

This analysis demonstrates the potential positive budget impact of adopting miRNA testing in place of CT scans in the clinical management of TGCTs.

Exploring the potential cost-effectiveness of precision medicine treatment strategies for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Activated B-cell-like (ABC) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is associated with worse survival after standard rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (RCHOP) chemoimmunotherapy compared to germinal center B-cell-like (GCB) subtype. Preliminary evidence suggests that benefits from novel agents may vary by subtype. Hypothesizing that treatment stratified by DLBCL subtype could be potentially cost-effective, we developed micro-simulation models to compare three first-line treatment strategies: (1) standard RCHOP for all patients (2) subtype testing followed by RCHOP for GCB and novel treatment for ABC DLBCL, and (3) novel treatment for all patients. Based on phase 2 evidence, we used lenalidomide + RCHOP as a surrogate novel treatment. The subtype-based approach showed a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $15,015/quality-adjusted life year compared with RCHOP. Although our exploratory analyses demonstrated a wide range of conditions where subtype-based treatment remained cost-effective, data from phase 3 trials are needed to validate our models' findings and draw definitive conclusions.

Simulation modeling for stratified breast cancer screening - a systematic review of cost and quality of life assumptions

BACKGROUND

The economic evaluation of stratified breast cancer screening gains momentum, but produces also very diverse results. Systematic reviews so far focused on modeling techniques and epidemiologic assumptions. However, cost and utility parameters received only little attention. This systematic review assesses simulation models for stratified breast cancer screening based on their cost and utility parameters in each phase of breast cancer screening and care.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted to compare economic evaluations with simulation models of personalized breast cancer screening. Study quality was assessed using reporting guidelines. Cost and utility inputs were extracted, standardized and structured using a care delivery framework. Studies were then clustered according to their study aim and parameters were compared within the clusters.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were identified within three study clusters. Reporting quality was very diverse in all three clusters. Only two studies in cluster 1, four studies in cluster 2 and one study in cluster 3 scored high in the quality appraisal. In addition to the quality appraisal, this review assessed if the simulation models were consistent in integrating all relevant phases of care, if utility parameters were consistent and methodological sound and if cost were compatible and consistent in the actual parameters used for screening, diagnostic work up and treatment. Of 18 studies, only three studies did not show signs of potential bias.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows that a closer look into the cost and utility parameter can help to identify potential bias. Future simulation models should focus on integrating all relevant phases of care, using methodologically sound utility parameters and avoiding inconsistent cost parameters.

Micro-cost Analysis of ALK Rearrangement Testing by FISH to Determine Eligibility for Crizotinib Therapy in NSCLC: Implications for Cost Effectiveness of Testing and Treatment

Break-apart fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is the gold standard test for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangement. However, this methodology often is assumed to be expensive and potentially cost-prohibitive given the low prevalence of ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases. To more accurately estimate the cost of ALK testing by FISH, we developed a micro-cost model that accounts for all cost elements of the assay, including laboratory reagents, supplies, capital equipment, technical and pathologist labor, and the acquisition cost of the commercial test and associated reagent kits and controls. By applying a set of real-world base-case parameter values, we determined that the cost of a single ALK break-apart FISH test result is $278.01. Sensitivity analysis on the parameters of batch size, testing efficiency, and the cost of the commercial diagnostic testing products revealed that the cost per result is highly sensitive to batch size, but much less so to efficiency or product cost. This implies that ALK testing by FISH will be most cost effective when performed in high-volume centers. Our results indicate that testing cost may not be the primary determinant of crizotinib (Xalkori^®) treatment cost effectiveness, and suggest that testing cost is an insufficient reason to limit the use of FISH testing for ALK rearrangement.

The cost-effectiveness of returning incidental findings from next-generation genomic sequencing

PURPOSE

The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recommended that clinical laboratories performing next-generation sequencing analyze and return pathogenic variants for 56 specific genes it considered medically actionable. Our objective was to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of returning these results.

METHODS

We developed a decision-analytic policy model to project the quality-adjusted life-years and lifetime costs associated with returning ACMG-recommended incidental findings in three hypothetical cohorts of 10,000 patients.

RESULTS

Returning incidental findings to cardiomyopathy patients, colorectal cancer patients, or healthy individuals would increase costs by $896,000, $2.9 million, and $3.9 million, respectively, and would increase quality-adjusted life-years by 20, 25.4, and 67 years, respectively, for incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $44,800, $115,020, and $58,600, respectively. In probabilistic analyses, returning incidental findings cost less than $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year gained in 85, 28, and 91%, respectively, of simulations. Assuming next-generation sequencing costs $500, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for primary screening of healthy individuals was $133,400 (<$100,000/quality-adjusted life-year gained in 10% of simulations). Results were sensitive to the cohort age and assumptions about gene penetrance.

CONCLUSION

Returning incidental findings is likely cost-effective for certain patient populations. Screening of generally healthy individuals is likely not cost-effective based on current data, unless next-generation sequencing costs less than $500.

Health technology assessment and personalized medicine: are economic evaluation guidelines sufficient to support decision making?

BACKGROUND

Many jurisdictions delivering health care, including Canada, have developed guidance for conducting economic evaluation, often in the service of larger health technology assessment (HTA) and reimbursement processes. Like any health intervention, personalized medical (PM) interventions have costs and consequences that must be considered by reimbursement authorities with limited resources. However, current approaches to economic evaluation to support decision making have been largely developed from population-based approaches to therapy-that is, evaluating the costs and consequences of single interventions across single populations. This raises the issue as to whether these methods, as they are or more refined, are adequate to address more targeted approaches to therapy, or whether a new paradigm for assessing value in PM is required.

OBJECTIVES

We describe specific issues relevant to the economic evaluation of diagnostics-based PM and assess whether current guidance for economic evaluation is sufficient to support decision making for PM interventions.

METHODS

Issues were identified through literature review and informal interviews with national and international experts (n = 10) in these analyses. This article elaborates on findings and discussion at a workshop held in Ottawa, Canada, in January 2012.

RESULTS

Specific issues related to better guiding economic evaluation of personalized medicine interventions include: how study questions are developed, populations are characterized, comparators are defined, effectiveness is evaluated, outcomes are valued and how resources are measured. Diagnostics-based PM also highlights the need for analyses outside of economic evaluation to support decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

The consensus of this group of experts is that the economic evaluation of diagnostics-based PM may not require a new paradigm. However, greater complexity means that existing approaches and tools may require improvement to undertake these more analyses.

Current challenges in health economic modeling of cancer therapies: a research inquiry

BACKGROUND

The demand for economic models that evaluate cancer treatments is increasing, as healthcare decision makers struggle for ways to manage their budgets while providing the best care possible to patients with cancer. Yet, after nearly 2 decades of cultivating and refining techniques for modeling the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of cancer therapies, serious methodologic and policy challenges have emerged that question the adequacy of economic modeling as a sound decision-making tool in oncology.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to explore some of the contentious issues associated with the development and use of oncology economic models as informative tools in current healthcare decision-making. Our objective was to draw attention to these complex pharmacoeconomic concerns and to promote discussion within the oncology and health economics research communities.

METHODS

Using our combined expertise in health economics research and economic modeling, we structured our inquiry around the following 4 questions: (1) Are economic models adequately addressing questions relevant to oncology decision makers; (2) What are the methodologic limitations of oncology economic models; (3) What guidelines are followed for developing oncology economic models; and (4) Is the evolution of oncology economic modeling keeping pace with treatment innovation? Within the context of each of these questions, we discuss issues related to the technical limitations of oncology modeling, the availability of adequate data for developing models, and the problems with how modeling analyses and results are presented and interpreted.

DISCUSSION

There is general acceptance that economic models are good, essential tools for decision-making, but the practice of oncology and its rapidly evolving technologies present unique challenges that make assessing and demonstrating value especially complex. There is wide latitude for improvement in oncology modeling methodologies and how model results are presented and interpreted.

CONCLUSION

Complex technical and data availability issues with oncology economic modeling pose serious concerns that need to be addressed. It is our hope that this article will provide a framework to guide future discourse on this important topic.

Cost-effectiveness of screening and treating Helicobacter pylori for gastric cancer prevention

Gastric cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. A meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials concluded that Helicobacter pylori eradication reduces gastric cancer incidence by 35%. Current consensus is that H. pylori screening and treatment is cost-effective only in high-risk populations. This paper provides an up-to-date overview of the evidence for cost-effectiveness of H. pylori screening and treatment in different population settings and risk levels for H. pylori infection. Ten unique cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses were identified. All found that screening for H. pylori to prevent gastric cancer in the general population costs less than $50,000 per LYG. This finding was robust for differences in H. pylori prevalence, gender and ethnicity. Based on limited evidence, re-treatment (for treatment failure), repeated screening, limiting screening and treatment to those with the CagA phenotype, or universal treatment, does not appear to be cost-effective. However, most included studies failed to consider both the broader benefits as well as the adverse effects of widespread use of antibiotics for H. pylori.

Multiomics medicine in oncology: assessing effectiveness, cost–effectiveness and future research priorities for the molecularly unique individual

The development of genomic technologies has ushered in the era of pharmacogenomics. However, discoveries and clinical use of targeted therapies are still in their infancy. A focus on monogenic pharmacogenetic traits may contribute to this lack of progress. Variation in drug response is likely a complex paradigm involving not only genomic factors but proteomic, metabolomic and epigenomic influences. The incorporation of these omics elements into pharmaceutical development and clinical decision-making will ultimately require the use of methods to determine clinical and economic value. Current methodologies and guidelines for determining clinical effectiveness and cost–effectiveness may have limited applicability to the increasingly personalized nature of omics treatment strategies. Using examples from oncology, this article argues for the adaptation and tailoring of three existing methods for ensuring development and clinical use of multiomics-guided therapies that are effective, safe and offer value for money.

Predictors of competing mortality to invasive breast cancer incidence in the Canadian National Breast Screening study

Background

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening requires estimates of the absolute risk of breast cancer, which is modified by various risk factors. Breast cancer incidence, and thus mortality, is altered by the occurrence of competing events. More accurate estimates of competing risks should improve the estimation of absolute risk of breast cancer and benefit from breast cancer screening, leading to more effective preventive, diagnostic, and treatment policies. We have previously described the effect of breast cancer risk factors on breast cancer incidence in the presence of competing risks. In this study, we investigate the association of the same risk factors with mortality as a competing event with breast cancer incidence.

Methods

We use data from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study, consisting of two randomized controlled trials, which included data on 39 risk factors for breast cancer. The participants were followed up for the incidence of breast cancer and mortality due to breast cancer and other causes. We stratified all-cause mortality into death from other types of cancer and death from non-cancer causes. We conducted separate analyses for cause-specific mortalities.

Results

We found that “age at entry” is a significant factor for all-cause mortality, and cancer-specific and non-cancer mortality. “Menstruation length” and “number of live births” are significant factors for all-cause mortality, and cancer-specific mortality. “Ever noted lumps in right/left breasts” is a factor associated with all-cause mortality, and non-cancer mortality.

Conclusions

For proper estimation of absolute risk of the main event of interest common risk factors associated with competing events should be identified and considered.

How the practice of allergy shows the promise and challenge of personalized medicine

Personalized medicine seeks to stratify therapies according to individual characteristics, and by so doing improve effectiveness and reduce complications. However, there are not many models of care that is highly stratified within a single diagnosis in this manner. One potential model is the practice of allergy, in which care is tailored to specific allergens for individual patients within the broader context of care for rhinitis or asthma. Allergists have already confronted many of the same regulatory issues anticipated for personalized medicine. The history of allergy practice also anticipates some of the patient safety concerns that may arise from tracking and using highly personalized medical information. Finally, the therapy of allergy and asthma has been at the forefront of attempts to incorporate pharmacogenomics information into patient care. Individualized therapy has always been central to the practice of allergy, and so provides a useful proving ground for personalized medicine as a concept of care.