Cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy combined with thoracic radiotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for limited stage small cell lung cancer: A population-based propensity-score matched analysis

Investigation of the Possible Protective Effect of N-Acetylcysteine (NAC) against Irinotecan (CPT-11)-Induced Toxicity in Rats

Irinotecan (CPT-11) is a chemotherapeutic agent involved in the treatment regimens for several malignancies such as colorectal cancer. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is a strong antioxidant and anti-inflammatory agent used in the treatment of several diseases related to oxidative stress and inflammation. This study aimed at investigating whether NAC provides protection against hepatorenal and gastrointestinal tissue damage induced by CPT-11. Thirty-two Wistar albino rats were divided into four groups as control, NAC, CPT-11, and CPT-11+NAC. Following the experimental period, blood, and tissue samples (liver, kidney, stomach, and small intestine) were collected, and biochemical indicators, together with pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α and IL-1β), matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), malondialdehyde (MDA), glutathione peroxidase (GPx) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) levels were evaluated. Both the biochemical indicators and the pro-inflammatory cytokines, MMP, and MDA levels increased in animals treated with CPT-11, while SOD and GPx activities decreased. Histopathological evaluation revealed structural damage in all examined tissues. With NAC administration, significant improvements were observed, both biochemically and histologically. In conclusion, the results of the present study suggest that NAC treatment together with CPT-11 may have a beneficial effect on reducing CPT-11 toxicity in rats, by modulating inflammation and the oxidant-antioxidant balance. These results strongly promote further investigative studies.

Big Data and Real-World Data based Cost-Effectiveness Studies and Decision-making Models: A Systematic Review and Analysis

Background: Big data and real-world data (RWD) have been increasingly used to measure the effectiveness and costs in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). However, the characteristics and methodologies of CEA based on big data and RWD remain unknown. The objectives of this study were to review the characteristics and methodologies of the CEA studies based on big data and RWD and to compare the characteristics and methodologies between the CEA studies with or without decision-analytic models. Methods: The literature search was conducted in Medline (Pubmed), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library (as of June 2020). Full CEA studies with an incremental analysis that used big data and RWD for both effectiveness and costs written in English were included. There were no restrictions regarding publication date. Results: 70 studies on CEA using RWD (37 with decision-analytic models and 33 without) were included. The majority of the studies were published between 2011 and 2020, and the number of CEA based on RWD has been increasing over the years. Few CEA studies used big data. Pharmacological interventions were the most frequently studied intervention, and they were more frequently evaluated by the studies without decision-analytic models, while those with the model focused on treatment regimen. Compared to CEA studies using decision-analytic models, both effectiveness and costs of those using the model were more likely to be obtained from literature review. All the studies using decision-analytic models included sensitivity analyses, while four studies no using the model neither used sensitivity analysis nor controlled for confounders. Conclusion: The review shows that RWD has been increasingly applied in conducting the cost-effectiveness analysis. However, few CEA studies are based on big data. In future CEA studies using big data and RWD, it is encouraged to control confounders and to discount in long-term research when decision-analytic models are not used.

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review

Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100-1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria.

Comparative effectiveness of concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of clinical stage IIIb lung adenocarcinoma patients with mutant EGFR

BACKGROUND

The standard of care for fit locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT). However, in a subset of patients with lung adenocarcinoma with mutant EGFR (LA-mEGFR), the role of EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is not clear. We compared CCRT versus TKIs for the treatment of stage IIIb LA-mEGFR in a Taiwanese population.

METHODS

We identified patients from the Taiwan Cancer Registry with good performance status at clinical stage IIIb LA-mEGFR, diagnosed from June 2011 to December 2015 and treated with either TKIs or CCRT. Clinical covariables and survival status were also collected. The Cox regression method was used in the primary analyses and several propensity score methods and alternative study cohort definitions were used in additional analyses.

RESULTS

We compared the data of 177 TKI and 22 CCRT patients and found no statistically significant difference in overall (adjusted hazard ratio of death 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.34-1.47) or lung cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.31-1.35). The results of most additional analyses were insignificant.

CONCLUSION

In this population-based study from Taiwan with limited case numbers, no statistical difference in the survival outcomes of patients with clinical stage IIIb LA-mEGFR treated with either EGFR-TKIs or CCRT was determined. Further prospective studies are needed to clarify our findings.

Comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for patients with non-metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A population-based propensity-score-matched analysis

Whether the survival outcome of patients with non-metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (NM-ESCC) receiving definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is better with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) has been debated in the literature. We designed this population-based propensity-score (PS)-matched analysis to address this question. We identified eligible patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2015 from the Taiwan Cancer Registry and constructed a PS-matched cohort (1:1 for IMRT vs 3DCRT) to balance observable potential confounders. We compared the hazard ratio (HR) of death between IMRT and 3DCRT during the entire follow-up period. We also evaluated freedom from local regional recurrence (FFLRR) and esophageal cancer-specific survival (ECSS). Sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed to examine the robustness of our findings. Our study population constituted 558 patients who were well balanced with regard to the measured covariables. The HR of death with IMRT compared to 3DCRT was 0.43 (95% confidence interval 0.35-0.52, P < .001). The results remained significant for FFLRR and ECSS. In SA, our results remained significant when additional covariables were taken into consideration. The survival outcome of patients with NM-ESCC receiving CCRT might be better with IMRT vs 3DCRT. These study results should be interpreted with caution given some possible covariates lacking in the registry. Further studies are needed to clarify this issue.

Comparative effectiveness of image-guided radiotherapy for non-operated localized esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A population-based propensity score matched analysis

Background

Although concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) coupled with image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) is associated with a theoretical benefit in non-operated localized esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (NOL-ESCC) patients, there is currently no clinical evidence to support this.

Results

The study population in the primary analysis comprised 866 patients who were well balanced in terms of their co-variables. The HR for mortality when group A was compared with group B was 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.7–0.95). SA revealed that the result was moderately sensitive.

Materials and Methods

Eligible patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2013 were identified in the Taiwan Cancer Registry. A propensity score-matched cohort was constructed [1:1 in groups A (with IGRT) and B (without IGRT)] to balance any observable potential confounders. The hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was compared between groups A and B during the follow-up period. Sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed to evaluate the robustness of the findings regarding the selection of confounders and a potential unobserved confounder.

Conclusions

The current results provide the first clinical evidence that CCRT coupled with IGRT is associated with better overall survival when compared with CCRT without IGRT in NOL-ESCC patients. However, this study should be interpreted with caution given its non-randomized nature and the moderate sensitivity of the data. Further studies are needed to clarify this finding.

Cost-Effectiveness of Thoracic Radiation Therapy for Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer Using Evidence From the Chest Radiotherapy Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer Trial (CREST)

PURPOSE

The Chest Radiotherapy Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer Trial (CREST) showed that adding thoracic radiation therapy (TRT) to the standard treatment (ST) paradigm of chemotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation improves overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of adding TRT to ST in ES-SCLC patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A cost-utility analysis was performed comparing TRT plus ST versus ST alone. The base-case time horizon was 24 months, consistent with the maximum PFS reported in the CREST. Overall survival was partitioned into 2 health states: PFS and postprogression survival. The proportion of patients in each health state over time was estimated by fitting parametric probability distributions to the CREST survival data. Costs were from a US health care payer perspective, and utilities were derived from the literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) using a 3% discount rate. Sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty in key variables.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, adding TRT to ST was both cost saving and more effective, thereby strongly dominating ST alone. At willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000/QALY, $100,000/QALY, and $200,000/QALY, TRT was preferred 68%, 81%, and 96% of the time, respectively. In the lifetime scenario analysis, the TRT ICER increased to $194,726/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

By use of the actual follow-up interval reported in the CREST, adding TRT to ST strongly dominates a strategy of ST alone in ES-SCLC patients. Since the long-term survival benefit of TRT is small relative to ongoing costs of progressive metastatic disease, we estimate less favorable ICERs for TRT over a lifetime horizon.

Does higher radiation dose lead to better outcome for non-operated localized esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients who received concurrent chemoradiotherapy? A population based propensity-score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal radiotherapy dose for non-operated localized esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (NOL-ESCC) patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is hotly debated.

METHODS

We identified eligible patients diagnosed within 2008-2013 from Taiwan Cancer Registry and constructed a propensity score matched cohort (1:1 for high dose (⩾60Gy) vs standard dose (50-50.4Gy)) to balance observable potential confounders. We compared the hazard ratio (HR) of death between standard and high radiotherapy dose groups during the entire follow-up period. We performed sensitivity analysis (SA) to evaluate the robustness of our finding regarding potential unobserved confounders & index date definition.

RESULTS

Our study population constituted 648 patients with well balance in observed co-variables. The HR of death when high dose was compared to standard dose was 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.64-0.88). Our result was sensitive to potential unobserved confounders but robust to alternative index date definition in SA.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that higher than standard radiotherapy dose may lead to better survival for NOL-ESCC patients undergoing CCRT.

Cost-effectiveness of neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus esophagectomy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A population-based matched case-control study

Background

Neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (NCCRT) is often considered for locally‐advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA‐ESCC) patients; however, no data regarding the cost‐effectiveness of this treatment is available. Our study aimed to evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of NCCRT versus esophagectomy for LA‐ESCC at population level.

Methods

We identified LA‐ESCC patients diagnosed within 2008–2009 and treated with either NCCRT or esophagectomy through the Taiwan Cancer Registry. We included potential confounding covariables (age, gender, residency, comorbidity, social‐economic status, disease stage, treating hospital level and surgeon's experience, and the use of endoscopic ultrasound before treatment) and used propensity score (PS) to construct a 1:1 population. The duration of interest was three years within the date of diagnosis. Effectiveness was measured as overall survival. We took the payer's perspective and converted the cost to 2014 United States dollars (USD). In sensitivity analysis, we evaluated the potential impact of an unmeasured confounder on the statistical significance of incremental net benefit at suggested willingness‐to‐pay.

Results

Our study population constituted 150 PS matched subjects. The mean cost (2014 USD) and survival (year) were higher for NCCRT compared with esophagectomy (US$91,460 vs. $75,836 for cost; 2.2 vs. 1.8 for survival) with an estimated incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of US$39,060/life‐year.

Conclusions

When compared to esophagectomy, NCCRT is likely to improve survival and is probably more cost‐effective. Cost‐effectiveness results should be interpreted with caution given our results were sensitive to potential unmeasured confounder(s) in sensitivity analysis.

Cost and effectiveness of image-guided radiotherapy for non-operated localized lung cancer: a population-based propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) is a novel technology to enhance RT delivery accuracy. However, the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are less clear. The aim of our study is to compare the cost and effectiveness of conventional fractionated RT for non-operated localized lung cancer delivered with vs. without IGRT via this population-based propensity score (PS) matched analysis.

METHODS

We identified eligible patients diagnosed within 2007-2010 through a comprehensive population-based database containing cancer, death registries, and reimbursement data in Taiwan. The primary duration of interest (DOI) was 2 years within diagnosis. Effectiveness was measured as survival whereas direct medical cost was measured from the payers' perspective. In supplementary analysis (SA), we estimated the cost-effectiveness in consider of out-of-pocket (OOP) payment and 4 years as DOI.

RESULTS

Our study population constituted 124 patients. Within 2 years, both the mean cost (2014 USD) and survival (life-year, LY) were higher for IGRT ($60,774 vs. $60,554; 1.43 vs. 1.37). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) when IGRT was compared to non-IGRT was 3,667 (USD/LY). The chance for IGRT to be cost-effective was around 68% & 70% at willingness-to-pay threshold 50,000 USD/LY and 150,000 USD/LY respectively. IGRT remained cost-effective in SA.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide the first empirical evidence that when compared to non-IGRT, IGRT was potentially cost-effective.

Cost and effectiveness of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is a minimally invasive alternative to conventional surgery (CS). We aimed to estimate the short-term cost-effectiveness of VATS vs. CS for clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC-c-stage-I) patients from the payer's perspective (National Health Insurance).

METHODS

We identified NSCLC-c-stage-I patients diagnosed and received surgery within 2007-2009 through a comprehensive population-based database containing cancer and death registries, and reimbursement data. The duration of interest was 1 year. We included potential confounding covariables through literature searching and our own experience, and used a propensity score to construct a 1:1 population for adjustment.

RESULTS

Our study population constituted 966 patients. The mean hospital stay [days, standard deviation (SD)] were 14.4 [7] and 16.1 (7.7) for VATS and CS respectively (P=0.002). The mean cost (2013 USD) and survival (year) was $22,316 vs. $21,976 and 0.98 vs. 0.974 for VATS vs. CS. The probability for VATS to be cost-effective (i.e., positive net benefit) was 0.49 & 0.56 at willingness-to-pay (WTP) 50,000 & 100,000 USD/life-year, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide the first empirical evidence that when compared to CS, VATS was potentially cost-effective in the short term (1 year) within the common WTP levels in Taiwan.