A cost-effectiveness analysis of contact X-ray brachytherapy for treatment of patients with a partial response to chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. S14
Author(s):  
Christopher Rao ◽  
Fraser Mc Lean Smith ◽  
Antony Paul Martin ◽  
Amandeep Dhadda ◽  
Alexandra Stewart ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. e192249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann C. Raldow ◽  
Aileen B. Chen ◽  
Marcia Russell ◽  
Percy P. Lee ◽  
Theodore S. Hong ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15602-e15602
Author(s):  
Gong Chen ◽  
Feng Wang ◽  
Weiwei Xiao ◽  
Ying Jin ◽  
Rong-Xin Zhang ◽  
...  

e15602 Background: Immunotherapy has shown satisfactory effect for dMMR/MSI-H colorectal cancer patients. Whether Pd-1 antibody would bring benefit for dMMR/MSI-H locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients in neoadjuvant setting is worthy of investigation. This is a clinical trial with two cohorts according the MMR/MSI status(clinicalTrials.gov, NCT04304209). Methods: LARC patients with dMMR or MSI-H tumor will enter Cohort A and receive neoadjuvant Pd1 antibody sintilimab for four cycles and subsequent surgery or watch and wait, followed by adjuvant four cycles of Pd1 antibody sintilimab with or without chemotherapy. Main inclusion criteria include: cT3-4N0M0 or cTxN+M0 rectal adenocarcinoma, dMMR/MSI-H confirmed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or gene test, aged 18-75y; ECOG performance 0-1; no previous anti-tumor treatment for rectal adenocarcinoma. Primary outcome is pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. We use a Simon two-stage optimum design to test the null hypothesis of a 15% pCR rate, the historical response rate to standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT), against the desired alternative of 30% pCR rate. This had a one-sided type I error of 5% and a power of 80%. In the first stage of this design, 19 patients will be accrued. If 3 or fewer pCR was observed, the study was to be terminated and declared negative. If the trial goes on to the second stage, a total of 55 patients will be studied. The study was deemed to have met its primary endpoint if confirmed pCR were observed in 13 or more patients. Considering 10% dropout rate, a total of 61 patients will be enrolled. Whole exome sequencing, bulk RNA sequencing, single cell RNA sequencing and IHC of the rectal primary tumor are planned. The study started in October, 2019. Results: Eight patients have been enrolled and six have response evaluation results. Four patients achieved clinical complete response (cCR) after 4 cycles of neoadjuvant Pd1 antibody sintilimab treatment and three of them enter watch and wait strategy and finished the adjuvant 4 cycles of Pd1 antibody sintilimab treatment. The 4th patient was diagnosed as lynch syndrome, but molecular test was not feasible for the tumors located at the sigmoid and hepatic flexure because of ileus. He received subtotal colectomy and tumors at the sigmoid and hepatic flexure also achieved pCR. The 5th patient has partial response after 4 and 8 cycles of sintilimab treatment, and then received Dixon surgery and pathology showed major reponse (5% cancer cell left only in the mucosal layer, ypTis). The 6th patient has partial response after 4 and 8 cycles of sintilimab treatment, and sintilimab was still continued concerning intact bladder conservation. No grade 3 toxicity was noted yet. Conclusions: Pd1 antibody sintilimab achieved 4CR (pCR+cCR) in 6 dMMR/MSI-H LARC patients with limited toxicities. Pd1 antibody is quite effective and may be an alternative for these patients. Clinical trial information: NCT04304209.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19374-e19374
Author(s):  
Jesus Rodriguez-Pascual ◽  
Javier Nuñez-Alfonsel ◽  
Benedetto Ielpo ◽  
Mercedes Lopez ◽  
Rafael Alvarez-Gallego ◽  
...  

e19374 Background: Chemoradiotheray (CR) followed by standard Surgical Resection (SR) is the standard treatment for distal locally-advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients after a clinical compete response (cCR). Some novel approach suggested better functional results using robotic rectal resection (RRR) or avoiding surgical procedure, called Watch and Wait (WW) strategy. Methods: A Markov model-based, cost-utility analysis estimating mean costs and QALYs per patient was performed to compare SR, RRR and WW strategies for patients achieving a cCR to CRT. Rates of local regrowth, recurrence and distant metastasis were derived from series comparing WW to SR and from our previous comparative study of RRR versus SR. Lifetime incremental cost-utility ratio was calculated between strategies, and sensitivity analysis were performed to study model uncertainly. A willingness-to-pay of 30.000 per Quality Adjusted-Life Year (QALY) was used as a threshold to determine the most cost-effective treatment. Results: The base case 15-years cancer-specific survival was 93.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.5-94.9] on a WW program, compared to 95.9% [95%CI 93.6-97.7] after RRR. WW was dominant relative to RRR with cost savings of $48,566.58 (95%CI $47,635.77 - $49,497.39 ) and incremental QALY of 7.47 (95%CI 1.46 – 7.48). WW was also dominant relative to LRR, with cost savings of $48,764.49 (95%CI $47,768.49 - $49,760.48 ) and incremental QALY of 7.44 (95%CI 7,43 – 7.45). WW remained dominant in sensitivity analysis unless the rate of SR fell to 73.0%). Conclusions: This study provides data of cost-effectiveness differences between SR, RRR, WW approaches in LARC after cCR, showing a benefit for WW.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document