1
|
Prasath V, Quinn PL, Arjani S, Li S, Oliver JB, Mahmoud O, Jaloudi M, Hajifathalian K, Chokshi RJ. Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer Management: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Am Surg 2024; 90:1268-1278. [PMID: 38225880 DOI: 10.1177/00031348241227180] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/17/2024]
Abstract
Across the nation, patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) are managed with modalities including upfront surgery (US) and perioperative chemotherapy (PCT). Preoperative therapies have demonstrated survival benefits over US and thus long-term outcomes are expected to vary between the options. However, as these 2 modalities continue to be regularly employed, we sought to perform a decision analysis comparing the costs and quality-of-life associated with the treatment of patients with LAGC to identify the most cost-effective option. We designed a decision tree model to investigate the survival and costs associated with the most commonly utilized management modalities for LAGC in the United States: US and PCT. The tree described costs and treatment strategies over a 6-month time horizon. Costs were derived from 2022 Medicare reimbursement rates using the third-party payer perspective for physicians and hospitals. Effectiveness was represented using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). One-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were utilized to test the robustness of our findings. PCT was the most cost-effective treatment modality for patients with LAGC over US with a cost of $40,792.16 yielding 3.11 QALYs. US has a cost of $55,575.57 while yielding 3.15 QALYs; the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $369,585.25. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses favored PCT in all variations of variables across their standard deviations. Across 100,000 Monte Carlo simulations, 100% of trials favored PCT. In our model simulating patients with LAGC, the most cost-effective treatment strategy was PCT. While US demonstrated improved QALYs over PCT, the associated cost was too great to justify its use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vishnu Prasath
- Department of Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA
- Department of Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Patrick L Quinn
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Simran Arjani
- Department of Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA
- Department of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Sharon Li
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA
| | - Joseph B Oliver
- Department of Surgery, East Orange Veterans Affairs Medical Center, East Orange, NJ, USA
| | - Omar Mahmoud
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Baptist MD Anderson, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Mohammed Jaloudi
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA
- Division of Medical Oncology, Scripps MD Anderson Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Kaveh Hajifathalian
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA
| | - Ravi J Chokshi
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Cipora E, Partyka O, Pajewska M, Czerw A, Sygit K, Sygit M, Kaczmarski M, Mękal D, Krzych-Fałta E, Jurczak A, Karakiewicz-Krawczyk K, Wieder-Huszla S, Banaś T, Bandurska E, Ciećko W, Deptała A. Treatment Costs and Social Burden of Pancreatic Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15061911. [PMID: 36980796 PMCID: PMC10047484 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15061911] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2023] [Revised: 03/17/2023] [Accepted: 03/20/2023] [Indexed: 03/30/2023] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: Pancreatic cancer is the cancer with the third-highest mortality rate, and forecasts indicate its growing share in morbidity. The basis of treatment is inpatient chemotherapy and there is a strong focus on palliative care. (2) Methods: A literature review was conducted based on the rapid review methodology in PubMed and Cochrane databases. The search was supplemented with publications from the snowball search. Qualitative assessment of included publications was performed using AMSTAR2 modified scheme. (3) Results: The review included 17 publications, of which majority concerned direct costs related to the adopted treatment regimen. Most of the publications focused on comparing the cost-effectiveness of drug therapies and the costs of palliative treatment. Other publications concerned indirect costs generated by pancreatic cancer. They particularly focused on the economic burden of lost productivity due to sickness absence. (4) Conclusion: The increase in the incidence of pancreatic cancer translates into an increase in the costs of the health care system and indirect costs. Due to the significant share of hospitalization in the health care structure, direct costs are increasing. The inpatient treatment regimen and side effects translate into a loss of productivity for patients with pancreatic cancer. Among gastrointestinal cancers, pancreatic cancer generates the second largest indirect costs, although it has a much lower incidence rate than the dominant colorectal cancer. This indicates a significant problem of the economic burden of this cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elżbieta Cipora
- Medical Institute, Jan Grodek State University in Sanok, 38-500 Sanok, Poland
| | - Olga Partyka
- Department of Economic and System Analyses, National Institute of Public Health NIH-National Research Institute, 00-791 Warsaw, Poland
- Department of Health Economics and Medical Law, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Monika Pajewska
- Department of Economic and System Analyses, National Institute of Public Health NIH-National Research Institute, 00-791 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Aleksandra Czerw
- Department of Economic and System Analyses, National Institute of Public Health NIH-National Research Institute, 00-791 Warsaw, Poland
- Department of Health Economics and Medical Law, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Katarzyna Sygit
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Calisia University, 62-800 Kalisz, Poland
| | - Marian Sygit
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Calisia University, 62-800 Kalisz, Poland
| | - Mateusz Kaczmarski
- Medical Institute, Jan Grodek State University in Sanok, 38-500 Sanok, Poland
| | - Dominika Mękal
- Department of Oncology Propaedeutics, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Edyta Krzych-Fałta
- Department of Basic of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Anna Jurczak
- Department of Clinical Nursing, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland
| | | | - Sylwia Wieder-Huszla
- Department of Clinical Nursing, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland
| | - Tomasz Banaś
- Department of Radiotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Institute-Oncology Centre, 31-115 Cracow, Poland
| | - Ewa Bandurska
- Center for Competence Development, Integrated Care and e-Health, Medical University of Gdansk, 80-204 Gdansk, Poland
| | - Weronika Ciećko
- Center for Competence Development, Integrated Care and e-Health, Medical University of Gdansk, 80-204 Gdansk, Poland
| | - Andrzej Deptała
- Department of Oncology Propaedeutics, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland
| |
Collapse
|