scholarly journals Daily Almond Consumption in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention via LDL-C Change in the U.S. Population: a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jifan Wang(New Corresponding Author) ◽  
Michelle A. Lee Bravatti ◽  
Elizabeth J. Johnson ◽  
Gowri Raman(Former Corresponding Author)
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Dietary Factors ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Healthcare Sector ◽  
Cvd Prevention ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The U.S

Abstract Objectives Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the health claim that 1.5 ounces (42.5 grams) of nut intake may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Previous studies have focused on the cost-effectiveness of other foods or dietary factors on primary CVD prevention, yet not in almond consumption. This study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of almond consumption in CVD primary prevention. Perspective & Setting This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of consuming 42.5 grams of almond from the U.S. healthcare sector perspective. Methods A decision model was developed for 42.5 grams of almond per day versus no almond consumption and CVD in the U.S. population. Parameters in the model were derived from the literature, which included the probabilities of increasing LDL-C, developing acute myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke, treating MI, dying from the disease and surgery, as well as the costs of the disease and procedures in the U.S. population, and the quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The cost of almonds was based on the current price in the U.S. market. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for different levels of willingness-to-pay, the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, ten-year risk prevention, different costs of procedures and almond prices, and patients with or without CVD. Results The almond strategy had $363 lower cost and 0.02 higher QALY gain compared to the non-almond strategy in the base-case model. The annual net monetary benefit (NMB) of almond consumption was $1,421 higher per person than no almond consumption, when the willingness to pay threshold was set at $50,000 for annual health care expenditure. Almond was more cost-effective than non-almond in CVD prevention in all the sensitivity analyses. Conclusion Consuming 42.5 grams of almonds per day is a cost-effective approach to prevent CVD in the short term and potentially in the long term.

scholarly journals Daily Almond Consumption in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention via LDL-C Change in the U.S. Population: a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jifan Wang ◽  
Michelle A. Lee Bravatti ◽  
Elizabeth J. Johnson ◽  
Gowri Raman
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Dietary Factors ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cvd Prevention ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The U.S

Abstract Background Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the health claim that 1.5 oz. (42.5 g) nut intake may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Previous studies have focused on the cost-effectiveness of other foods or dietary factors on primary CVD prevention, yet not in almond consumption. This study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of almond consumption in CVD prevention. Methods A decision model was developed for 42.5 g almond per day versus no almond consumption and CVD in the U.S. population. Parameters in the model were derived from the literature, which included the probabilities of increasing LDL-C, developing acute myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke, treating MI, dying from the disease and surgery, as well as the costs of the disease and procedures in the U.S. population, and the quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The cost of almonds was based on the current price in the U.S. market. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for the time of almond consumption, ten-year risk prevention, patients with or without CVD and using sex-specific probabilities for MI, and varying the costs of procedures and almonds. Results The almond strategy had $302 lower cost and 0.02 QALY gain compared to the non-almond strategy in the main analysis. The annual net monetary benefit (NMB) of almond consumption was $1,360 higher per person than no almond consumption, when the willingness to pay threshold was set at $50,000 for annual health care expenditure. Almond was more cost-effective than non-almond in CVD prevention in all the sensitivity analyses, except for the time of almond consumption as a morning or afternoon snack or when costs of almonds increased from $0.47 to $1.41 per day. Conclusion Consuming 42.5 g of almonds per day is a cost-effective approach to prevent CVD in the short term and potentially in the long term.

scholarly journals Daily Almond Consumption in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention via LDL-C Change in the U.S. Population: a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jifan Wang ◽  
Michelle A. Lee Bravatti ◽  
Elizabeth J. Johnson ◽  
Gowri Raman
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Disease Prevention ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cardiovascular Disease Prevention ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life Years ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The U.S

Abstract Background Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the health claim that 1.5 ounces (42.5 grams) of nut intake may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Previous studies have focused on the cost-effectiveness of other foods or dietary factors on primary cardiovascular disease prevention, yet not in almond consumption. This study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of almond consumption in cardiovascular disease primary prevention. Perspective & Setting This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of consuming 42.5 grams of almond from the U.S. healthcare sector perspective. Methods A decision model was developed for 42.5 grams of almond per day versus no almond consumption and cardiovascular disease in the U.S. population. Parameters in the model were derived from the literature, which included the probabilities of increasing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, developing acute myocardial infarction and stroke, treating acute myocardial infarction, dying from the disease and surgery, as well as the costs of the disease and procedures in the U.S. population, and the quality-adjusted life years. The cost of almonds was based on the current price in the U.S. market. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for different levels of willingness-to-pay, the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, ten-year risk prevention, different costs of procedures and almond prices, and patients with or without cardiovascular disease. Results The almond strategy had $363 lower cost and 0.02 higher quality-adjusted life years gain compared to the non-almond strategy in the base-case model. The annual net monetary benefit of almond consumption was $1,421 higher per person than no almond consumption, when the willingness to pay threshold was set at $50,000 for annual health care expenditure. Almond was more cost-effective than non-almond in cardiovascular disease prevention in all the sensitivity analyses. Conclusion Consuming 42.5 grams of almonds per day is a cost-effective approach to prevent cardiovascular disease in the short term and potentially in the long term.

Cost-effectiveness of tyrosine kinase inhibition in first-line treatment of patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20504-e20504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiaqi Han ◽  
Huabin Hu ◽  
Mengting Liao ◽  
Longjiang She ◽  
Linli Yao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Tyrosine Kinase ◽  
Egfr Mutation ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The U.S

e20504 Background: Patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation have improved survival with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatments, but the economic efficiency of this application is unclear, especially in limited health resource settings. To inform policy makers about the value of these medications, we developed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of these strategies. Methods: A Markov model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy, gefitinib, erlotinib, afatinib and osimertinib treatments from a public payers’ perspective in the U.S and China. Health states consisted of progression-free survival, progressive disease, and death. Model transition, adverse event probabilities, disease progression, and death were obtained from randomized clinical trials and network meta-analysis. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) over a 10-year lifetime horizon were calculated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed by multiple potentially modifiable parameters. Results: The tyrosine kinase inhibitors were more cost-effective than chemotherapy treatment in both the U.S and China. In the U.S, compared with erlotinib, afatinib had an ICER of $241,420/QALY while osimertinib had an ICER of $351,315/QALY. In China, the incremental utility for osimertinib versus gefitinib was 0.68QALYs, and the ICER was $25,622/QALY. The probability sensitivity analyses also illustrated that the erlotinib was the optimal treatment at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY in the U.S and osimertinib was the most cost-effective treatment at a WTP of $26,508/QALY in China. Conclusions: Based on our current analysis, erlotinib appears to be the preferred first-line treatment for advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients in the US at a WTP of $150,000/QALY. However, because of the price reduction and more health benefits, osimertinib was considered to be most cost-effective at a WTP of $26,508/QALY in China.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Atrial Fibrillation Screening for Stroke Prevention in China: A Markov Model

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lihui Zhou ◽  
Ye Cao ◽  
Bei Gao ◽  
Wenli Lu ◽  
Yuan Wang
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Routine Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of community-based Atrial fibrillation (AF) screening by 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) in Chinese healthcare setting.Methods: A Markov state transition model was used to simulate the costs and effects on a 55/65/75-year-old cohort under routine care and AF screening by 12-lead ECG. The circle length was 1 year, and people were simulated until 90 years old. The cost-effectiveness analysis was perform using a societal perspective. Transition probability, costs, and utility data were derived from open dataset and published literature. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to exam the uncertainty of the results. Results: Annual AF screening in 65/75-year-old cohort was highly cost-effective with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) Chinese Yuan Renminbi (CNY) 64147/49736 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Annual AF screening in 65/75-year-old cohort was associated with 535/492 prevented ischemic strokes and 174/163 more intracerebral hemorrhages, and the anticoagulation rate increased from the assumed 10% on routine care to 61.5%. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that these two strategies have 55% and 78% chances of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 1× gross domestic product per capita of China in 2019, US $10635 QALY.Conclusion: Annual community-based screening of population aged 65 years and older in China is likely to be cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds to reduce the unnecessary burden of strokes.

Cost effectiveness of DPYD genotyping to screen for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency prior to adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 55-55
Author(s):  
Gabriel A. Brooks ◽  
Stephanie Tapp ◽  
Allan T. Daly ◽  
Jonathan Busam ◽  
Anna N.A. Tosteson
Keyword(s):  
Colon Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Transition Probabilities ◽  
Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Dpyd Gene ◽  
Cancer Screen ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The U.S

55 Background: Fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy agents, including 5-fluorouracil and capecitabine, are the backbone of adjuvant treatment for colon cancer, and adjuvant chemotherapy substantially reduces recurrence and mortality after surgical resection of stage 3 colon cancer. While fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy is generally safe, the risk of severe, potentially fatal chemotherapy toxicity is substantially increased for the 2-3% of U.S. patients with DPD deficiency caused by pathogenic variants in the DPYD gene. DPYD genotype testing is readily available in the U.S. but has not been widely adopted. We evaluated the cost effectiveness of DPYD genotyping prior to adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer in the U.S. Methods: We constructed a Markov model to simulate screening for DPD deficiency with DPYD genotyping (versus no screening) among patients receiving fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage 3 colon cancer. Screen-positive patients were modeled to receive dose-reduced fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. Model transition probabilities for treatment-related toxicities were derived from published clinical trial data with annotation of DPYD genotype and chemotherapy dosing strategy. Our analysis is from the healthcare perspective, with a time horizon of five years and an annual discount rate of 3% for future costs and benefits. Direct healthcare costs and health utilities were estimated from published sources and converted to 2020 US dollars, and post-treatment survival was modeled from SEER data. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). We used a value of $100,000/QALY as the cost-effectiveness threshold. One-way sensitivity analyses were used to examine model uncertainty. Results: Compared with no screening, screening for DPD deficiency with DPYD genotyping increased per-patient costs by $106 and improved quality-adjusted survival by 0.0028 QALYs, leading to an ICER of $37,300/QALY. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the ICER exceeded $100,000/QALY when the carrier frequency of pathogenic DPYD gene variants was less than 1.17%, and when the specificity of DPYD genotyping was less than 98.9%. Cost-effectiveness estimates were not sensitive to the cost of DPYD genotyping, the cost of toxicity-related hospitalizations, or the health utility associated with grade 3-4 toxicity. Conclusions: Among patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for stage 3 colon cancer, screening for DPD deficiency with DPYD genotyping is a cost-effective strategy for preventing infrequent but severe, sometimes fatal toxicities of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy.

scholarly journals Cladribine tablets are a cost-effective strategy in high-disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis patients in Iran

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nayyereh Ayati ◽  
Lora Fleifel ◽  
Mohammad Ali Sahraian ◽  
Shekoufeh Nikfar
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
High Disease Activity ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis Patients ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis

Background: Cladribine tablets are the foremost oral immune-reconstitution therapy for high disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis (HDA-RMS). We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of cladribine tablets compared to natalizumab in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran. Methods: A 5-year cohort-based Markov model was developed with 11 expanded disability status score (EDSS) health states, including patients with HDA-RMS as on and off-treatment. All costs were identified from the literature and expert opinion and were measured in Iranian Rial rates, changed to the 2020 USD rate and were discounted by 7.2%. Quality adjusted life years (QALY), discounted by 3.5%, and life years gained (LYG) were adopted to measure efficacy. The final results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio that was compared to a national willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of 1 to 3 gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (D/PSA) were employed to evaluate uncertainty. Results: Cladribine tablets dominated natalizumab and yielded 6,607 USD cost-saving and 0.003 additional QALYs per patient. LYG was comparable. The main cost component was drug acquisition cost in both arms. DSA indicated the sensitivity of the results to the cost discount rates and also the patients’ body weight; while they were less sensitive to the main clinical variables. PSA indicated that cladribine tablets were cost-effective in Iran, with a probability of 57.5% and 58.6% at lower and higher limits of threshold, respectively. Conclusion: Cladribine tablets yielded higher QALYs and lower costs compared to natalizumab, in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of Triple Therapy with Telaprevir for Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Patients in Germany

10.36469/9870 ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jona T. Stahmeyer ◽  
Svenja Schauer ◽  
Siegbert Rossol ◽  
Hans Heinrich Wedemeyer ◽  
Daniel Wirth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
Triple Therapy ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Healthcare Sector ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Previously Treated Patients ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
The Cost

Background: About 400,000-500,000 people are infected with hepatitis C in Germany. Long-term consequences are the development of liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. The introduction of first generation protease inhibitors has significantly improved the treatment of hepatitis C genotype 1 patients. The aim of the study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of triple therapy with telaprevir in Germany. Methods: We used a Markov model on disease progression and natural history to assess the cost-effectiveness of triple therapy with telaprevir compared to standard treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin. Model structure and inputs were discussed with clinical experts. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to verify the robustness of results. Results: The base-case analyses shows that triple therapy results in higher costs (untreated patients: €48,446 vs. €30,691; previously treated patients: €63,228 vs. €48,603) and better outcomes (untreated patients: 16.85 qualily of life years [QALYs] vs. 15.97 QALYs; previously treated patients: 14.16 QALYs vs. 12.89 QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was €20,131 per QALY and €30,567 per life year gained (LYG) for previously untreated patients. ICER in treatment experienced patients was €7,664 per QALY for relapse patients, €12,506 per QALY for partial responders and €28,429 per QALY for null responders. Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Although triple therapy with telaprevir leads to additional costs, there is a high probability of being cost-effective for different thresholds. This health economic analysis makes an important contribution to current debates on cost savings and efficient resource allocation in the German healthcare sector.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab for BCG-unresponsive carcinoma in situ of the bladder.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 395-395
Author(s):  
Vidit Sharma ◽  
Kevin Wymer ◽  
Christopher Saigal ◽  
Karim Chamie ◽  
Mark S. Litwin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Index Patient ◽  
Price Reduction ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

395 Background: Patients with BCG-unresponsive carcinoma in situ (CIS) are treated with radical cystectomy (RCx) or salvage intravesical chemotherapy (SIC). Recently, the FDA approved pembrolizumab for BCG-unresponsive CIS +/- papillary tumors. Given the costs and toxicities of pembrolizumab, it remains unclear whether its benefits are sufficient to warrant widespread use for BCG-unresponsive CIS. To that end, we conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing pembrolizumab with RCx and SIC (using gemcitabine-docetaxel as the prototypical regimen) for patients with BCG-unresponsive CIS. Methods: A decision-analytic Markov model compared pembrolizumab, SIC (with gemcitabine-docetaxel), and RCx for patients with BCG-unresponsive CIS +/- papillary tumors who are RCx candidates (index patient 1) or are unwilling/unable to undergo RCx (index patient 2). Each treatment option was a Markov node containing distinct variations of the following health states: surveillance, recurrence, progression to MIBC, progression to metastasis, treatment toxicity, and death. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were compared using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/Quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The model used a US Medicare perspective with a 5-year time horizon for the base case. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed for all model parameters. Results: For index patient 1, pembrolizumab was not cost-effective vs. RCx (ICER $1,403,008) or SIC (ICER $2,011,923). One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that pembrolizumab only became cost-effective relative to RCx with a > 93% price reduction. Relative to RCx, SIC was cost-effective for time horizons < 5 years and nearly cost-effective at 5 years (ICER $118,324). One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that SIC became cost-effective relative to RCx if its risk of recurrence or metastasis at 2 years was less than 55% or 5.9%, respectively. For index patient 2, pembrolizumab required > 90% price reduction to be cost-effective vs. RCx (ICER $1,073,240). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed that pembrolizumab was unlikely to be cost-effective even at high willingness-to-pay thresholds. Further sensitivity analyses found that no two-way combination of extrapolated values resulted in pembrolizumab being favored over RCx or SIC for either index patient. Conclusions: Based on decision-analytic Markov modeling of treatment options for patients with BCG-unresponsive CIS, pembrolizumab was unlikely to be cost-effective without a > 90% price reduction. While both RCx and SIC were more cost-effective than pembrolizumab, further studies may validate the cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine-docetaxel relative to RCx if the recurrence and metastasis thresholds are met. Overall, our model supports the preferential use of RCx and SIC over pembrolizumab for BCG-unresponsive CIS.

First-Line Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Youwen Zhu ◽  
Huabin Hu ◽  
Dong Ding ◽  
Shuosha Li ◽  
Mengting Liao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Us ◽  
Extensive Stage ◽  
The Cost ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Background：The phase III clinical trial Keynote-604 indicated that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy could generate clinical benefits in Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer (ES-SCLC). We aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC from the United States (US) payers’ perspective.Methods: A synthetical Markov model was used to evaluate cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab plus platinum-etoposide (EP) versus EP in first-line therapy for ES-SCLC from the data of Keynote-604. Lifetime costs life-years (LYs), quality adjusted LYs (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. In addition, We also considered subgroup cost-effectiveness.Results: Pembrolizumab plus EP resulted in additional 0.18 QALYs (0.32 LYs) and corresponding incremental costs $113,625, resulting an ICER of $647,509 per QALY versus EP. The most influential factor in this model was the cost of pembrolizumab. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed there was 0% probability that pembrolizumab combination chemotherapy was cost-effective at willingness-to-pay (WTP) values of $150,000 per QALY in the US. The results of subgroup probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that all subgroups were not cost-effective.Conclusion: From the perspective of the US payer, pembrolizumab plus EP is not a cost-effective option as first-line treatment for patients with ES-SCLC at a WTP threshold of $150,000 per QALY.

P14.41 Cost-effectiveness of FET PET for early treatment response assessment in glioma patients following adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii46-ii46
Author(s):  
J Rosen ◽  
G Ceccon ◽  
E K Bauer ◽  
J M Werner ◽  
C Kabbasch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Tree Model ◽  
Fet Pet ◽  
Conventional Mri ◽  
Adjuvant Temozolomide ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Temozolomide Chemotherapy

Abstract BACKGROUND In light of increasing healthcare costs, higher medical expenses should be justified socio-economically. Therefore, we calculated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PET using the radiolabeled amino acid O-(2-[18F]-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET) compared to conventional MRI for early identification of responders to adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy. A recent study in IDH-wildtype glioma patients suggested that after two cycles, FET-PET parameter changes predicted a significantly longer survival while MRI changes were not significant. MATERIALS AND METHODS To determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of serial FET-PET imaging, we analyzed published clinical data and calculated the associated costs in the context of the German healthcare system.Based on a decision-tree model, FET-PET and MRI’s effectiveness was calculated, i.e., the probability to correctly identify a responder as defined by an overall survival ≥15 months. To determine the cost-effectiveness, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated, i.e., the cost for each additionally identified responder by FET-PET who would have remained undetected by MRI. The robustness of the results was tested by deterministic and probabilistic (Monte Carlo simulation) sensitivity analyses. RESULTS Compared to MRI, FET-PET increases the rate of correctly identified responders to chemotherapy by 26%; thus, four patients need to be examined by FET-PET to identify one additional responder. Considering the respective cost for serial FET-PET and MRI, the ICER resulted in €4,396.83 for each additional correctly identified responder by FET-PET. The sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSION In contrast to conventional MRI, the model suggests that FET PET is cost-effective in terms of ICER values. Concerning the high cost of temozolomide, the integration of FET-PET has the potential to avoid premature chemotherapy discontinuation at a reasonable cost.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document