Risk stratification in breast cancer screening: Cost-effectiveness and harm-benefit ratios for low-risk and high-risk women

In mammography screening programmes, women are screened according to a one-size-fits-all principle. Tailored screening, based on risk levels, may lead to a better balance of benefits and harms. With microsimulation modelling, we determined optimal mammography screening strategies for women at lower (relative risk [RR] 0.75) and higher (RR 1.8) than average risk of breast cancer, eligible for screening, using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of current uniform screening in the Netherlands (biennial [B] 50-74) as a threshold ICER. Strategies varied by interval (annual [A], biennial, triennial [T]) and age range. The number of life-years gained (LYG), breast cancer deaths averted, overdiagnosed cases, false-positive mammograms, ICERs and harm-benefit ratios were calculated. Optimal risk-based screening scenarios, below the threshold ICER of €8883/LYG, were T50-71 (€7840/LYG) for low-risk and B40-74 (€6062/LYG) for high-risk women. T50-71 screening in low-risk women resulted in a 33% reduction in false-positive findings, a similar reduction in costs and improved harm-benefit ratios compared to the current screening schedule. B40-74 in high-risk women led to an increase in screening benefit, compared to current B50-74 screening, but a relatively higher increase in false-positive findings. In conclusion, optimal screening consisted of a longer interval and lower stopping age than current uniform screening for low-risk women, and a lower starting age for high-risk women. Extending the interval for women at lower risk from biennial to triennial screening reduced harms and costs while maintaining most of the screening benefit.     

Deep Brain Stimulation Compared With Contingency Management for the Treatment of Cocaine Use Disorders: A Threshold and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

ObjectivesCocaine is the second most frequently used illicit drug worldwide (after cannabis), and cocaine use disorder (CUD)-related deaths increased globally by 80% from 1990 to 2013. There is yet to be a regulatory-approved treatment. Emerging preclinical evidence indicates that deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the nucleus accumbens may be a therapeutic option. Prior to expanding the costly investigation of DBS for treatment of CUD, it is important to ensure societal cost-effectiveness.AimsWe conducted a threshold and cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the success rate at which DBS would be equivalent to contingency management (CM), recently identified as the most efficacious therapy for treatments of CUDs.Materials and MethodsQuality of life, efficacy, and safety parameters for CM were obtained from previous literature. Costs were calculated from a societal perspective. Our model predicted the utility benefit based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio resulting from two treatments on a one-, two-, and five-year timeline.ResultsOn a one-year timeline, DBS would need to impart a success rate (ie, cocaine free) of 70% for it to yield the same utility benefit (0.492 QALYs per year) as CM. At no success rate would DBS be more cost-effective (incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000) than CM during the first year. Nevertheless, as DBS costs are front loaded, DBS would need to achieve success rates of 74% and 51% for its cost-effectiveness to exceed that of CM over a two- and five-year period, respectively.ConclusionsWe find DBS would not be cost-effective in the short term (one year) but may be cost-effective in longer timelines. Since DBS holds promise to potentially be a cost-effective treatment for CUDs, future randomized controlled trials should be performed to assess its efficacy.     

The prognostic and predictive role of 21-gene recurrence scores in hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer

Over the past two decades, gene expression profiling of breast cancer has emerged as an important tool in early-stage breast cancer management. The approach provides important information on underlying biological mechanisms, breast cancer classification, future risk potential of developing recurrent metastatic disease, and provides beneficial clues for adjuvant chemotherapy in hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer. Of the commercially available genomic tests for breast cancer, the prognostic and predictive value of 21-gene recurrence score tests have been validated using both retrospective data and prospective clinical trials. In this paper, we reviewed the current evidence on 21-gene expression profiles for HR-positive HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer management. We show that current evidence supports endocrine therapy alone as an appropriate adjuvant systemic therapy for approximately 70% of women with HR-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer. Evolving evidence also suggests that 21-gene recurrence scores have predictive values for node-positive breast cancer and that chemotherapy can be avoided in more than half of women with nodes 1 to 3 positive HR-positive breast cancer. Furthermore, retrospective data also supports the predictive role of 21-gene recurrence scores for adjuvant radiation therapy. A prospective trial in this area is ongoing.     

Microwave Ablation versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Stage I Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

PurposeTo assess the cost effectiveness of microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with inoperable stage I non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Materials and MethodsA literature search was performed in MEDLINE with broad search clusters. A decision-analytic model was constructed over a 5-year period. The model incorporated treatment-related complications and long-term recurrence. All clinical parameters were derived from the literature with preference to long-term prospective trials. A healthcare payers’ perspective was adopted. Outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) extracted from prior studies and U.S. dollars from Medicare reimbursements and prior studies. Base case calculations, probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, and multiple 1- and 2-way sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsMWA yielded a health benefit of 2.31 QALYs at a cost of $195,331, whereas SBRT yielded a health benefit of 2.33 QALYs at a cost of $225,271. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $1,480,597/QALY, indicating that MWA is the more cost-effective strategy. The conclusion remains unchanged in probabilistic sensitivity analysis with MWA being the optimal cost strategy in 99.84% simulations. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that MWA remains cost effective when its annual recurrence risk is <18.4% averaged over 5 years, when the SBRT annual recurrence risk is >1.44% averaged over 5 years, or when MWA is at least $7,500 cheaper than SBRT.ConclusionsMWA appears to be more cost effective than SBRT for patients with inoperable stage I NSCLC.     

抗VEGF类药物与传统激光疗法用于治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的药物经济学评价

目的从中国全社会角度出发,评价抗血管内皮生长因子(vascular endothelial growth factor,VEGF)类药物(雷珠单抗、阿柏西普)与激光光凝用于治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的成本-效果。方法构建Markov模型,通过随机对照试验、已发表文献和医院调研获得3种干预措施治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿的临床疗效、健康效用及成本数据,对各干预措施下患者终身的疾病转归、质量调整生命年(QALYs)及成本进行长期模拟。计算增量成本-效果比(ICER),并进行单因素和概率敏感性分析。结果与激光光凝相比,雷珠单抗的ICER值为61174元·QALY^-1,阿柏西普的ICER值为138232元·QALY^-1,均小于我国3倍人均GDP(59660元,2017年),抗VEGF类药物具有经济性。比较雷珠单抗与阿柏西普,雷珠单抗QALY更高成本更低,占绝对优势。单因素和概率敏感性分析证明了结果的稳健性。结论雷珠单抗、阿柏西普与激光光凝相比,在治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿方面均具有成本-效果;其中雷珠单抗效果更好成本更低,在治疗糖尿病性黄斑水肿方面占绝对优势。