Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presentation is heterogeneous necessitating a variety of therapeutic interventions with varying efficacies and associated prognoses. Poor prognostic patients often undergo non-curative palliative interventions including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), sorafenib...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thein, Hla-Hla, Qiao, Yao, Zaheen, Ahmad, Jembere, Nathaniel, Sapisochin, Gonzalo, Chan, Kelvin K. W., Yoshida, Eric M., Earle, Craig C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5634563/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29016627
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185198
_version_ 1783270116006297600
author Thein, Hla-Hla
Qiao, Yao
Zaheen, Ahmad
Jembere, Nathaniel
Sapisochin, Gonzalo
Chan, Kelvin K. W.
Yoshida, Eric M.
Earle, Craig C.
author_facet Thein, Hla-Hla
Qiao, Yao
Zaheen, Ahmad
Jembere, Nathaniel
Sapisochin, Gonzalo
Chan, Kelvin K. W.
Yoshida, Eric M.
Earle, Craig C.
author_sort Thein, Hla-Hla
collection PubMed
description Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presentation is heterogeneous necessitating a variety of therapeutic interventions with varying efficacies and associated prognoses. Poor prognostic patients often undergo non-curative palliative interventions including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), sorafenib, chemotherapy, or purely supportive care. The decision to pursue one of many palliative interventions for HCC is complex and an economic evaluation comparing these interventions has not been done. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of non-curative palliative treatment strategies such as TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, sorafenib alone, and non-sorafenib chemotherapy compared with no treatment or best supportive care (BSC) among patients diagnosed with HCC between 2007 and 2010 in a Canadian setting. Using person-level data, we estimated effectiveness in life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) along with total health care costs (2013 US dollars) from the health care payer’s perspective (3% annual discount). A net benefit regression approach accounting for baseline covariates with propensity score adjustment was used to calculate incremental net benefit to generate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and uncertainty measures. Among 1,172 identified patients diagnosed with HCC, 4.5%, 7.9%, and 5.6%, received TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, sorafenib, and non-sorafenib chemotherapy clone, respectively. Compared with no treatment or BSC (81.9%), ICER estimates for TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib was $6,665/QALY (additional QALY: 0.47, additional cost: $3,120; 95% CI: -$18,800-$34,500/QALY). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve demonstrated that if the relevant threshold was $50,000/QALY, TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, non-sorafenib chemotherapy, and sorafenib alone, would have a cost-effectiveness probability of 99.7%, 46.6%, and 5.5%, respectively. Covariates associated with the incremental net benefit of treatments are age, sex, comorbidity, and cancer stage. Findings suggest that TACE with or without sorafenib is currently the most cost-effective active non-curative palliative treatment approach to HCC. Further research into new combination treatment strategies that afford the best tumor response is needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5634563
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56345632017-10-30 Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting Thein, Hla-Hla Qiao, Yao Zaheen, Ahmad Jembere, Nathaniel Sapisochin, Gonzalo Chan, Kelvin K. W. Yoshida, Eric M. Earle, Craig C. PLoS One Research Article Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presentation is heterogeneous necessitating a variety of therapeutic interventions with varying efficacies and associated prognoses. Poor prognostic patients often undergo non-curative palliative interventions including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), sorafenib, chemotherapy, or purely supportive care. The decision to pursue one of many palliative interventions for HCC is complex and an economic evaluation comparing these interventions has not been done. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of non-curative palliative treatment strategies such as TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, sorafenib alone, and non-sorafenib chemotherapy compared with no treatment or best supportive care (BSC) among patients diagnosed with HCC between 2007 and 2010 in a Canadian setting. Using person-level data, we estimated effectiveness in life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) along with total health care costs (2013 US dollars) from the health care payer’s perspective (3% annual discount). A net benefit regression approach accounting for baseline covariates with propensity score adjustment was used to calculate incremental net benefit to generate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and uncertainty measures. Among 1,172 identified patients diagnosed with HCC, 4.5%, 7.9%, and 5.6%, received TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, sorafenib, and non-sorafenib chemotherapy clone, respectively. Compared with no treatment or BSC (81.9%), ICER estimates for TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib was $6,665/QALY (additional QALY: 0.47, additional cost: $3,120; 95% CI: -$18,800-$34,500/QALY). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve demonstrated that if the relevant threshold was $50,000/QALY, TACE alone or TACE+sorafenib, non-sorafenib chemotherapy, and sorafenib alone, would have a cost-effectiveness probability of 99.7%, 46.6%, and 5.5%, respectively. Covariates associated with the incremental net benefit of treatments are age, sex, comorbidity, and cancer stage. Findings suggest that TACE with or without sorafenib is currently the most cost-effective active non-curative palliative treatment approach to HCC. Further research into new combination treatment strategies that afford the best tumor response is needed. Public Library of Science 2017-10-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5634563/ /pubmed/29016627 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185198 Text en © 2017 Thein et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Thein, Hla-Hla
Qiao, Yao
Zaheen, Ahmad
Jembere, Nathaniel
Sapisochin, Gonzalo
Chan, Kelvin K. W.
Yoshida, Eric M.
Earle, Craig C.
Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting
title Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting
title_full Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting
title_short Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting
title_sort cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5634563/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29016627
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185198
work_keys_str_mv AT theinhlahla costeffectivenessanalysisoftreatmentwithnoncurativeorpalliativeintentforhepatocellularcarcinomaintherealworldsetting
AT qiaoyao costeffectivenessanalysisoftreatmentwithnoncurativeorpalliativeintentforhepatocellularcarcinomaintherealworldsetting
AT zaheenahmad costeffectivenessanalysisoftreatmentwithnoncurativeorpalliativeintentforhepatocellularcarcinomaintherealworldsetting
AT jemberenathaniel costeffectivenessanalysisoftreatmentwithnoncurativeorpalliativeintentforhepatocellularcarcinomaintherealworldsetting
AT sapisochingonzalo costeffectivenessanalysisoftreatmentwithnoncurativeorpalliativeintentforhepatocellularcarcinomaintherealworldsetting
AT chankelvinkw costeffectivenessanalysisoftreatmentwithnoncurativeorpalliativeintentforhepatocellularcarcinomaintherealworldsetting
AT yoshidaericm costeffectivenessanalysisoftreatmentwithnoncurativeorpalliativeintentforhepatocellularcarcinomaintherealworldsetting
AT earlecraigc costeffectivenessanalysisoftreatmentwithnoncurativeorpalliativeintentforhepatocellularcarcinomaintherealworldsetting