Cost-effectiveness of sorafenib versus SBRT for unresectable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Economic evaluation of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States and China

BACKGROUND

Camrelizumab combined with rivoceranib has been proven effective for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, their higher prices than sorafenib could impose a substantial economic burden on patients.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of the combination of camrelizumab and rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for patients with uHCC from the perspective of the US and Chinese payers.

METHOD

Using data from the CARES-310 trial, a partitioned survival model (PSM) was developed, considering the perspectives of the US and Chinese payers. The model employed a 15-year time horizon and a biweekly cycle. Direct medical costs and utility data were collected from previous studies and open-access databases. Primary outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Price simulations, sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The ICER for the US and China was $122,388.62/QALY and $30,410.56/QALY, respectively, falling below the willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of $150,000/QALY for the US and $35,898.87/QALY for China. Price simulations indicated the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib when the price of camrelizumab (200 mg) remained below $6275.19 in the US and $558.09 in China. The primary determinant of cost-effectiveness in both regions was the cost of camrelizumab.

CONCLUSION

The combination of camrelizumab and rivoceranib is a cost-effective first-line therapy for uHCC in both the US and China. Lowering their prices could significantly influence their cost-effectiveness and accessibility to patients. These findings will guide clinicians in treating uHCC and help decision-makers formulate value-based drug pricing strategies.

Economic evaluation of stereotactic radiotherapy and stereotactic radiosurgery technologies in the treatment of cancers: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review study investigated the cost-effectiveness of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for treatment of various types of cancers.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from 30 December 1990 to 1 January 2023. The entered studies were screened in accordance with the inclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria encompassed all types of economic evaluation studies that investigated SRT/SRS technologies in the treatment of various cancers.

RESULTS

A total of 47 articles were included in the review. The findings suggest that the use of Linear accelerator technology for the treatment of lung cancer (8 out of 12 studies) and prostate cancer (4 out of 5 studies) was a cost-effective strategy. Linear accelerator was found to be cost-effective in the treatment of liver metastases and liver cancer (2 out of 5 studies). All of the included studies that used Gamma Knife technology in brain metastases reported Gamma-Knife was a cost-effective treatment. Furthermore, in the treatment of prostate and liver cancer, proton therapy was identified as a cost-effective option than other treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that SRT/SRS is a cost-effective procedure for the treatment of various types of cancers. Therefore, it is recommended to use SRT/SRS technology for optimal use of resources.

SBRT vs. Y90: HCC Treatment Outcomes and Costs

OBJECTIVES

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) and Yttrium-90 (Y90) are among the ablative therapies used as treatment options for localized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). To date, direct comparisons of the 2 modalities' outcomes and costs are lacking. This study aimed to analyze demographic, treatment, and cost information for patients with HCC treated with SBRT and Y90.

METHODS

Patients with HCC treated with SBRT or Y90 radioembolization between January 2018 and January 2020 at one institution were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic and treatment data were compared utilizing χ 2 tests. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were applied to compare overall survival and progression-free survival in different treatment groups. Cox proportional hazard models were applied to analyze the unadjusted and adjusted survival differences. Ten SBRT and 10 Y90 patients were randomly selected for Medicare cost analysis.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients received Y90, and 21 received SBRT. On univariable and multivariable analysis, there was no significant difference in overall survival or progression-free survival between the Y90 and SBRT cohorts. SBRT patients had higher American Joint Committee on Cancer staging ( P =0.039), greater tumor size (4.07 vs. 2.96 cm, P =0.013), and greater rates of prior liver-directed therapy (71.4% SBRT vs. 12.7% Y90, P <0.001). The average cost for SBRT was $15,148, and Y90 was $41,360.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT and Y90 are effective therapies in the treatment of HCC, specifically having similar overall survival and progression-free survival. Y90 was found to have a significantly higher cost than SBRT. This study demonstrates the need for prospective studies to assess these modalities in treating HCC.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Non-Contrast Abbreviated Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance in Cirrhosis

Background/Aims

Ultrasonography has a low sensitivity for detecting early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhotic patients. Non-contrast abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (aMRI) demonstrated a comparable performance to that of magnetic resonance imaging without the risk of contrast media exposure and at a lower cost than that of full diagnostic MRI. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of non-contrast aMRI for HCC surveillance in cirrhotic patients, using ultrasonography with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) as a reference.

Methods

Cost-utility analysis was performed using a Markov model in Thailand and the United States. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated using the total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained in each strategy. Surveillance protocols were considered cost-effective based on a willingness-to-pay value of $4,665 (160,000 Thai Baht) in Thailand and $50,000 in the United States.

Results

aMRI was cost-effective in both countries with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $3,667/QALY in Thailand and $37,062/QALY in the United States. Patient-level microsimulations showed consistent findings that aMRI was cost-effective in both countries. By probabilistic sensitivity analysis, aMRI was found to be more cost-effective than combined ultrasonography and AFP with a probability of 0.77 in Thailand and 0.98 in the United States. By sensitivity analyses, annual HCC incidence was revealed as the most influential factor affecting cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness of aMRI increased in settings with a higher HCC incidence. At a higher HCC incidence, aMRI would remain cost-effective at a higher aMRI-to-ultrasonography with AFP cost ratio.

Conclusions

Compared to ultrasonography with AFP, non-contrast aMRI is a cost-effective strategy for HCC surveillance and may be useful for such surveillance in cirrhotic patients, especially in those with high HCC risks.

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is associated with significant financial burden for patients and payers. The objective of this study was to review economic models to identify, evaluate, and compare cost-effectiveness estimates for HCC treatments.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify economic evaluations was performed and studies that modeled treatments for HCC reporting costs and cost effectiveness were included. Risk of bias was assessed qualitatively, considering costing approach, reported study perspective, and funding received. Intervention costs were adjusted to 2021 US dollars for comparison. For studies reporting quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), we conducted analyses stratified by comparison type to assess cost effectiveness at the time of the analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies were included. Non-curative versus non-curative therapy comparisons were used in 20 (74.1%) studies, curative versus curative comparisons were used in 5 (18.5%) studies, and curative versus non-curative comparisons were used in 2 (7.4%) studies. Therapy effectiveness was estimated using a QALY measure in 20 (74.1%) studies, while 7 (25.9%) studies only assessed life-years gained (LYG). A health sector perspective was used in 26 (96.3%) of the evaluations, with only 1 study including costs beyond this perspective. Median intervention cost was $53,954 (range $4550-$4,760,835), with a median incremental cost of $6546 (range - $72,441 to $1,279,764). In cost-utility analyses, 11 (55%) studies found the intervention cost effective using a $100,000/QALY threshold at the time of the study, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) ranging from - $1,176,091 to $1,152,440 when inflated to 2021 US dollars.

CONCLUSION

The majority of HCC treatments were found to be cost effective, but with significant variation and with few studies considering indirect costs. Standards for value assessment for HCC treatments may help improve consistency and comparability.

Transcatheter Arterial Embolization Containing Donafenib Induces Anti-Angiogenesis and Tumoricidal CD8+ T-Cell Infiltration in Rabbit VX2 Liver Tumor

Purpose

To evaluate the effect and immune response of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) combined with donafenib in rabbit VX2 liver tumor model.

Materials and Methods

Thirty-six New Zealand white rabbits with VX2 liver tumor were randomly divided into three groups. The LD group was treated with the emulsion of 0.5 mL lipiodol and 4 mg donafenib via hepatic arterial administration. The LE group was treated with the emulsion of 0.5 mL lipiodol and 4 mg epirubicin. The control group was treated with the equal volume of saline. Four rabbits were euthanized in each group on day 1, 3 and 7 after treatment. The tumor growth, histological markers associated with angiogenesis and immune response were assessed by imaging and histopathology. In addition, immune modulatory cytokines included interleukin (IL)-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interferon (IFN)-γ, and biochemical hepatorenal function were measured.

Results

Compared to other groups, LD group achieved lower tumor growth rate, fewer metastatic lesions, and higher tumor necrosis rate on day 7 after treatment. The percentage of CD31-positive area in the LD group was significantly lower than that in the LE group on day 3 and 7 after treatment. In addition, CD8⁺ lymphocytes infiltration was more pronounced in LD group than in LE group on day 7 after treatment, regardless of in the tumor or adjacent liver tissue. Serum cytokines including IL-6, TNF-α and IFN-γ were strongly upregulated in the LD group on day 1 after treatment. And there was no significant difference in the hepatorenal function between LD group and LE group after treatment.

Conclusion

The combination of TAE and angiogenesis inhibitor donafenib resulted in a potentiated tumoricidal effect, anti-angiogenesis and antitumour T cell response in rabbit VX2 liver tumor model. This may provide a potential basis for exploring the immune-related mechanisms of embolization in liver cancer.

Discovery of an Orally Efficacious MYC Inhibitor for Liver Cancer Using a GNMT-Based High-Throughput Screening System and Structure-Activity Relationship Analysis

Glycine-N-methyl transferase (GNMT) downregulation results in spontaneous hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Overexpression of GNMT inhibits the proliferation of liver cancer cell lines and prevents carcinogen-induced HCC, suggesting that GNMT induction is a potential approach for anti-HCC therapy. Herein, we used Huh7 GNMT promoter-driven screening to identify a GNMT inducer. Compound K78 was identified and validated for its induction of GNMT and inhibition of Huh7 cell growth. Subsequently, we employed structure-activity relationship analysis and found a potent GNMT inducer, K117. K117 inhibited Huh7 cell growth in vitro and xenograft in vivo. Oral administration of a dosage of K117 at 10 mpk (milligrams per kilogram) can inhibit Huh7 xenograft in a manner equivalent to the effect of sorafenib at a dosage of 25 mpk. A mechanistic study revealed that K117 is an MYC inhibitor. Ectopic expression of MYC using CMV promoter blocked K117-mediated MYC inhibition and GNMT induction. Overall, K117 is a potential lead compound for HCC- and MYC-dependent cancers.

Role of modern radiotherapy in managing patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of primary liver cancer. Several treatment options are available for managing HCC patients, classified roughly as local, local-regional, and systemic therapies. The high post-monotherapy recurrence rate of HCC urges the need for the use of combined modalities to increase tumor control and patient survival. Different international guidelines offer treatment recommendations based on different points of view and classification systems. Radiotherapy (RT) is a well-known local-regional treatment modality for managing many types of cancers, including HCC. However, only some of these treatment guidelines include RT, and the role of combined modalities is rarely mentioned. Hence, the present study reviewed clinical evidence for the use of different combined modalities in managing HCC, focusing on modern RT's role. Modern RT has an increased utility in managing HCC patients, mainly due to two driving forces. First, technological advancement (e.g., stereotactic body radiotherapy and advanced proton-beam therapy) enables precise delivery of radiation to increase tumor control and reduce side effects in the surrounding normal tissue. Second, the boom in developing target therapies and checkpoint-blockade immunotherapy prolongs overall survival in HCC patients, re-emphasizing the importance of local tumor control. Remarkably, RT combines with systemic therapies to generate the systemic therapy augmented by radiotherapy effect, a benefit now being actively investigated.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy in Patients With Oligometastatic Cancer

PURPOSE

The Stereotactic Ablative Radiation therapy for Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Tumors phase 2 randomized clinical trial found that stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) improved outcomes among cancer patients with oligometastatic disease. Yet, the cost of SABR along with the large number of patients with oligometastatic disease raises the important question of value. This study sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the addition of SABR compared with standard therapy alone among cancer patients with oligometastatic disease.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We constructed a Markov model to simulate treatment with stereotactic ablative radiation therapy or standard therapy among patients with oligometastatic cancers. The model derived transition probabilities from Stereotactic Ablative Radiation therapy for Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Tumors clinical trial data to estimate risks of toxicity, disease progression and survival. Health care costs and health utilities were estimated from the literature. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty. Cost-effectiveness was estimated from both the health care sector and societal perspectives with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) defined as dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). An ICER less than $100,000/QALY was considered cost-effective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine model uncertainty.

RESULTS

The addition of SABR increased total costs by $54,260 (health care sector perspective) or $72,799 (societal perspective) and improved effectiveness by 1.88 QALYs compared with standard therapy, leading to an ICER of $28,906/QALY (health care sector perspective) or $38,783/QALY (societal perspective). The model was modestly sensitive to assumptions about tumor progression, although the model was not sensitive to assumptions about survival or cost of treatment. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that SABR was the cost-effective treatment option 99.8% (health care sector perspective) or 98.7% (societal perspective) of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of SABR increased costs and improved quality adjusted survival, overall leading to a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with oligometastatic cancer.

Wogonin inhibits cell cycle progression by activating the glycogen synthase kinase-3 beta in hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Wogonin has been reported to exhibit various biological activities such as anti-inflammation, anti-microbial, and anti-tumor. Previous studies have demonstrated that wogonin could down-regulate Cyclin D1 activity on multiple cancers. However, the related mechanisms have not been fully elucidated so far.

PURPOSE

The aim of the current study was to explore whether wogonin can suppress hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progression and the mechanism of wogonin in inhibiting Cyclin D1 expression.

METHODS

Herein, we assessed the anti-tumor activity of wogonin against hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by MTT assay, clonogenic assay, cell cycle analysis and orthotopic xenograft mouse models. Western blot, immunofluoscence assay, co-immunoprecipitation assay, docking program, surface plasmon resonance, site-directed mutagenesis assay and immunohistochemical assay were performed for exploring the underlying mechanisms of wogonin-induced growth inhibition in HCC.

RESULTS

Our results showed that non-toxic dosage of wogonin (10, 20 µM) could inhibit cells proliferation and suppress cells cycle progression in MHCC97L and HepG2 cell. Moreover, the findings from the western blot and immunofluoscence assay confirmed the inhibition action of wogonin (10, 20 µM) on Cyclin D1 expression in MHCC97L cells, and wogonin (10, 20 µM) pre-treatment was capable of promoting Cyclin D1 ubiquitination and degradation in MHCC97L cell. In addition, wogonin promoted phosphorylation of Cyclin D1 on threonine-286 site, the mutation of threonine-286 to alanine-286A blocked Cyclin D1 proteolysis induced by wogonin. Wogonin-promoted Cyclin D1 phosphorylation and subsequent proteolysis may associate with the activation of GSK3beta in cancer cells. The phosphorylated form of GSK3beta (active form) expression was significantly increased after wogonin (20 µM) exposure. Molecular docking study and Biacore SPR analysis of GSK3beta mutant further validated the high-affinity wogonin binding site on GSK3beta. Moreover, in vivo studies further confirmed that phospho-GSK3beta Tyr216 was over-expressed in HCC specimens after wogonin treatment while the amount of Cyclin D1 was significantly decreased.

CONCLUSION

In summary, our data reveal a novel molecular mechanism by which wogonin induces HCC cells cycle arrest and suppresses tumor proliferation.

Health economic evaluation of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a novel noninvasive treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma. SBRT can achieve effective local control, but it requires a relatively high input of resources; this systematic review was performed to assess the cost effectiveness of SBRT in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma to provide a basis for government pricing and medical insurance decision-making. The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang and SinoMed databases were searched to collect economic evaluations of SBRT for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma from the date of database inception through December 31, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data and performed a descriptive analysis of the basic characteristics, methods of economic evaluation and main results, as well as the quality and heterogeneity of the reports. A total of 5 studies were included. Among them, the level of heterogeneity was relatively acceptable, with a median score of 90%. Four studies were cost-utility analyses (CUAs), and 1 was a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for sorafenib compared to SBRT was US $114,795 per quality-adjusted life year gained (cost/QALY) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The ICER for proton beam therapy compared to SBRT was US $6465 in patients with inoperable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The ICER for SBRT compared to RFA was US $164,660 for patients with unresectable colorectal cancer (CRC) with liver metastases and US $56,301 for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. For patients with inoperable localized hepatocellular carcinoma, compared with RFA–SBRT therapy, the ICERs for SBRT–SBRT and SBRT–RFA were US $558,679 and US $2197,000, respectively; RFA–RFA was dominated. In conclusion, there is limited evidence suggesting that SBRT could be cost-effective for highly specific subpopulations of HCC patients, and further economic evaluations based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies are needed.

Economic Implications of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance and Treatment: A Guide for Clinicians

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing worldwide, with significant morbidity and associated costs. Treatment allocation depends on the stage of diagnosis; however, resource utilization can be significant across all stages. We aimed to summarize the available data on the cost effectiveness of surveillance of and treatments for HCC in the context of current treatment guidelines. We performed a focused review of studies investigating the economic burden and cost effectiveness of HCC surveillance treatment modalities published between January 2000 and January 2019. The overall economic burden of HCC is increasing in the USA and in several countries worldwide due to its rising incidence and the proliferation of therapies. Liver transplantation is a cost-effective strategy for early-stage HCC treatment in selected patients. In settings where liver transplantation is not available or in patients awaiting transplant, ablative or locoregional therapies are cost effective with increases in quality-adjusted life-years. First-line therapy with sorafenib for advanced stage HCC is cost effective in the treatment of compensated cirrhosis. The cost effectiveness of recently approved systemic therapies for advanced HCC require further investigation. Existing studies have shown that guideline-recommended surveillance techniques and several available therapies for the treatment of HCC are cost effective; however, there are limitations in the literature, including reliance on suboptimal modeling with incomplete/simplified model structure or inadequate inputs. With increasing therapeutic options in patients with HCC, understanding their relative value is critical in designing HCC treatment algorithms.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of cabozantinib as second-line therapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

In the CELESTIAL trial for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cabozantinib showed improved survival compared with placebo but comes at a price. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib for sorafenib-resistant HCC from the payer's perspective of the USA, UK and China.

METHODS

We developed Markov models to simulate the patients pre-treated with first-line sorafenib following the CELESTIAL trial. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated for the treatment with cabozantinib or best supportive care. The list price for drugs was acquired from the Red Book, the British National Formulary, West China hospital and reported literature. Adverse events, utilities weights, and transition likelihood between states were sourced from the published randomized phase III trial. A willing-to-pay threshold was set $150 000/QALY in the USA, $70 671/QALY (£50 000/QALY) in the UK and $26 481/QALY (3x GDP per capita) in China. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were developed to test the models' uncertainty.

RESULTS

In the base case, treatment with cabozantinib increased effectiveness by 0.13 QALYs, resulting in an ICER vs best supportive care of $833 497/QALY in the USA, $304 177/QALY in the UK and $156 437/QALY in China. The models were most sensitive to assumptions about transitions to progression with both cabozantinib and best supportive care, the utility associated with being progression free. These results were robust across a range of scenarios and sensitivity analyses, including deterministic and probabilistic analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Cabozantinib at its current cost would not be a cost-effective treatment option for patients with sorafenib-resistant HCC from the payer's perspective in the USA, UK or China. Substantial discounts are necessary to meet conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds.

Lenvatinib Versus Sorafenib as First-Line Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

In a global, phase III, open-label, noninferiority trial (REFLECT), lenvatinib demonstrated noninferiority to sorafenib in overall survival and a statistically significant increase in progression-free survival in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recently, lenvatinib became the first agent in more than 10 years to receive approval as first-line therapy for unresectable HCC, along with the previously approved sorafenib. The objective of this study was to determine the comparative cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib and sorafenib as a first-line therapy of unresectable HCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A state-transition model of unresectable HCC was developed in the form of a cost-utility analysis. The model time horizon was 5 years; the efficacy of the model was informed by the REFLECT trial, and costs and utilities were obtained from published literature. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

Lenvatinib dominated sorafenib in the base case analysis. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that lenvatinib remains a cost-saving measure in 64.87% of the simulations. However, if the cost of sorafenib was reduced by 57%, lenvatinib would no longer be the dominant strategy.

CONCLUSION

Lenvatinib offered a similar clinical effectiveness at a lower cost than sorafenib, suggesting that lenvatinib would be a cost-saving alternative in treating unresectable HCC. However, lenvatinib may fail to remain cost-saving if a significantly cheaper generic sorafenib becomes available.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This analysis suggests an actionable clinical policy that will achieve cost saving. This cost-utility analysis showed that lenvatinib had a similar clinical effectiveness at a lower cost than sorafenib, indicating that lenvatinib may be a cost-saving measure in patients with unresectable HCC, in which $23,719 could be saved per patient. The introduction of a new therapeutic option for the first time in 10 years in Canada provides an important opportunity for clinicians, researchers, and health care decision-makers to explore potential modifications in recommendations and practice guidelines.

Cost-effectiveness of Sorafenib for Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in India

BACKGROUND

Majority of patients of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in India present in advanced stages, when curative treatment options are limited. We undertook this study to assess the cost-effectiveness of treating advanced HCC patients with sorafenib compared with best supportive care (BSC).

METHODS

A Markov model was parameterized to model the lifetime costs and consequences of treating advanced HCC patients with sorafenib versus BSC using a societal perspective. Cost of routine care, diagnostics, management of complications in both the arms and management of adverse effects of sorafenib treatment were considered. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was undertaken to assess the effect of parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

The incremental cost and benefit gained by treating HCC using sorafenib was Indian rupees 94,182 ($1459) and 0.19 quality adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient, implying an incremental cost of Indian rupees 507,520 ($7861) per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Sorafenib is not cost-effective for use in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treatment in India.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy in primary hepatocellular carcinoma: current status and future directions

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a form of radiation therapy that has been used in the treatment of primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) over the past decade. To evaluate the clinical efficacy of SBRT in primary HCC, a literature search was conducted to identify original research articles published from January 2000 through January 2018 in PubMed on SBRT in HCC. All relevant studies published from 2004 to 2018 were included. Prospective studies demonstrated 2-year local control (LC) rates ranging from 64-95% and overall survival (OS) rates ranging from 34% (2-year) to 65% (3-year). Retrospective studies demonstrated 2-year LC rates of 44-90% and 2-year OS rates of 24-67%. Reported toxicities in primary HCC patients vary but SBRT appears to be relatively well tolerated. Studies comparing SBRT to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are few, but they suggest SBRT may be more effective than RFA in specific primary HCC populations. Additionally, SBRT appears to increase the efficacy of both transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and sorafenib in selected primary HCC populations.

Cost-Effectiveness of Sorafenib Monotherapy and Selected Combination Therapy with Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sorafenib treatment in combination with other therapies versus sorafenib monotherapy among patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are enrolled in Taiwan's National Health Insurance.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to simulate treatment outcomes and direct medical costs of sorafenib combination therapy and monotherapy from the perspective of the healthcare payer in Taiwan. Both life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used to measure treatment outcomes, and all costs were expressed in 2014 New Taiwan dollars (NT$). Model parameters were acquired primarily using data from population-based administrative databases: the Cancer Registry, National Health Insurance Research Database, and the Death Registry. Willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at three times the per capita gross domestic product at NT$2,133,930. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

For advanced HCC patients, sorafenib combined with other treatments might not be a cost-effective option when compared with sorafenib therapy alone. In the base-case analysis, combination treatment with sorafenib was estimated to increase costs by NT$434,788 compared with monotherapy, with a gain of 0.1595 QALYs. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was NT$2,725,943 per QALY gained. Results were sensitive to health utility values and monthly costs accrued in the progression-free survival state of the combination therapy group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our evidence from Taiwan demonstrated that while sorafenib in combination with other therapeutic approaches might improve treatment outcome when compared with sorafenib monotherapy, its ICER exceeded the WTP threshold and was considered not cost-effective.

The role of external beam radiotherapy in the treatment of hepatocellular cancer

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in incidence and mortality. Although the prognosis remains poor, long-term survival has improved from 3% in 1970 to an 18% 5-year survival rate today. This is likely because of the introduction of well tolerated, oral antiviral therapies for hepatitis C. Curative options for patients with HCC are often limited by underlying liver dysfunction/cirrhosis and medical comorbidities. Less than one-third of patients are candidates for surgery, which is the current gold standard for cure. Nonsurgical treatments include embolotherapies, percutaneous ablation, and ablative radiation. Technological advances in radiation delivery in the past several decades now allow for safe and effective ablative doses to the liver. Conformal techniques allow for both dose escalation to target volumes and normal tissue sparing. Multiple retrospective and prospective studies have demonstrated that hypofractionated image-guided radiation therapy, used as monotherapy or in combination with other liver-directed therapies, can provide excellent local control that is cost effective. Therefore, as the HCC treatment paradigm continues to evolve, ablative radiation treatment has moved from a palliative treatment to both a "bridge to transplant" and a definitive treatment.

Wogonin Suppresses the Activity of Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 and Inhibits Migration and Invasion in Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma

As one of the major active ingredients in Radix Scutellariae, wogonin has been shown to be associated with various pharmacological activities on cancer cell growth, apoptosis, and cell invasion and migration. Here, we demonstrated that wogonin may harbor potential anti-metastatic activities in hepatocarcinoma (HCC). The anti-metastasis potential of wogonin and its underlying mechanisms were evaluated by ligand–protein docking approach, surface plasmon resonance assay, and in vitro gelatin zymography studies. Our results showed that wogonin (100 μM, 50 μM) suppressed MHCC97L and PLC/PRF/5 cells migration and invasion in vitro. The docking approach and surface plasmon resonance assay indicated that the potential binding affinity between wogonin and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) may lead to inhibition of MMP-9 activity and further leads to suppression of tumor metastasis. This conclusion was further verified by Western blot results and gelatin zymography analysis. Wogonin might be a potent treatment option for disrupting the tumor metastasis that favors HCC development. The potential active targets from computational screening integrated with biomedical study may help us to explore the molecular mechanism of herbal medicines.

Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Localized Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Nonsurgically Managed Patients: Analysis of the National Cancer Database

Purpose Data that guide selection of optimal local ablative therapy for the management localized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are lacking. Because there are limited prospective comparative data for these treatment modalities, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) by using the National Cancer Database. Methods We conducted an observational study to compare the effectiveness of RFA versus SBRT in nonsurgically managed patients with stage I or II HCC. Overall survival was compared by using propensity score-weighted and propensity score-matched analyses based on patient-, facility-, and tumor-level characteristics. A sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of severe fibrosis/cirrhosis. In addition, we performed exploratory analyses to determine the effectiveness of RFA and SBRT in clinically relevant patient subsets. Results Overall, 3,684 (92.6%) and 296 (7.4%) nonsurgically managed patients with stage I or II HCC received RFA or SBRT, respectively. After propensity matching, 5-year overall survival was 29.8% (95% CI, 24.5% to 35.3%) in the RFA group versus 19.3% (95% CI, 13.5% to 25.9%) in the SBRT group ( P < .001). Inverse probability-weighted analysis yielded similar results. The benefit of RFA was consistent across all subgroups examined and was robust to the effects of severe fibrosis/cirrhosis. Conclusion Our study suggests that treatment with RFA yields superior survival compared with SBRT for nonsurgically managed patients with stage I or II HCC. Even though our results are limited by the biases related to the retrospective study design, we believe that, in the absence of a randomized clinical trial, our findings should be considered when recommending local ablative therapy for localized unresectable HCC.

Value of quality of life analysis in liver cancer: A clinician’s perspective

Health related quality of life (HRQOL) is increasingly recognized as an important clinical parameter and research endpoint in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). HRQOL in HCC patients is multifaceted and affected by medical factor which encompasses HCC and its complications, oncological and palliative treatment for HCC, underlying liver disease, as well as the psychological, social or spiritual reaction to the disease. Many patients presented late with advanced disease and limited survival, plagued with multiple symptoms, rendering QOL a very important aspect in their general well being. Various instruments have been developed and validated to measure and report HRQOL in HCC patients, these included general HRQOL instruments, e.g., Short form (SF)-36, SF-12, EuroQoL-5D, World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment 100 (WHOQOL-100), World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment abbreviated version; general cancer HRQOL instruments, e.g., the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-General, Spitzer Quality of Life Index; and liver-cancer specific HRQOL instruments, e.g., EORTC QLQ-HCC18, FACT-Hepatobiliary (FACT-Hep), FACT-Hep Symptom Index, Trial Outcome Index. Important utilization of HRQOL in HCC patients included description of symptomatology and HRQOL of patients, treatment endpoint in clinical trial, prognostication of survival, benchmarking of palliative care service and health care valuation. In this review, difficulties regarding the use of HRQOL data in research and clinical practice, including choosing a suitable instrument, problems of missing data, data interpretation, analysis and presentation are examined. Potential solutions are also discussed.

Cost-Effectiveness of Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: a Critical Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to summarize and appraise published cost-effectiveness studies on stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).

RECENT FINDINGS

We performed a Medline search of cost-effectiveness studies of SRS, SBRT, and other cancer treatment modalities such as surgery and systemic therapy from 2006 to 2016. We included studies that used both modeling and retrospective review techniques. We excluded studies of benign disease. We defined a strategy whose incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is ≤$50,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) as "clearly cost-effective," a strategy whose ICER is ≤$100,000/QALY as "probably cost-effective," and a strategy ≤$200,000/QALY as "possibly cost-effective." We appraised modeling studies by determining whether or not they conform to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices (ISPOR) in modeling task force good research practices in model transparency and validation. We identified 24 studies that met inclusion criteria. Treatment sites included brain, bone, liver, lung, pancreas, and prostate. SRS and SBRT were clearly cost-effective strategies in 17 studies, probably cost-effective in 3 studies, and possibly cost-effective in 2 studies. Of the 16 modeling studies,15 conformed to transparency best practices; however, only 6 studies performed rigorous validation as described by the ISPOR guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

SRS and SBRT are likely to be cost-effective management strategies across a large variety of treatment sites and techniques. However, rigorous model validation techniques are lacking in these modeling studies.