首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Oncology Practice >Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Comparing Conventional Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Surgically Ineligible Stage I Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer
【24h】

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Comparing Conventional Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Surgically Ineligible Stage I Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

机译:成本效益分析比较常规与立体定向身体放疗治疗不适合手术的I期非小细胞肺癌

获取原文
           

摘要

AbstractThe authors show that based on a threshold of $50,000 per life-year gained, stereotactic body radiotherapy seems cost effective compared with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. Introduction: In 25% to 35% of patients with early stage I non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), surgery is not feasible, and external-beam radiation becomes their standard treatment. Conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) is the traditional radiation treatment standard; however, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is increasingly being adopted as an alternate radiation treatment. Our objective was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis, comparing SBRT with CFRT for stage I NSCLC in a public payer system. Methods: Consecutive patients were reviewed using 2010 Canadian dollars for direct medical costs from a public payer perspective. A subset of direct radiation treatment delivery costs, excluding physician billings and hospitalization, was also included. Health outcomes as life-years gained (LYGs) were computed using time-to-event methods. Sensitivity analyses identified critical factors influencing costs and benefits. Results: From January 2002 to June 2010, 168 patients (CFRT, n = 50; SBRT, n = 118) were included; median follow-up was 24 months. Mean overall survival was 2.83 years (95% CI, 1.8 to 4.1) for CFRT and 3.86 years (95% CI, 3.2 to not reached) for SBRT (P = .06). Mean costs for CFRT were $6,886 overall and $5,989 for radiation treatment delivery only versus $8,042 and $6,962, respectively, for SBRT. Incremental costs (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]) per LYG for SBRT versus CFRT were $1,120 for the public payer and $942 for radiation treatment alone. Varying survival and labor costs individually (± 20%) created the largest changes in the ICER, and simultaneous adjustment (± 5% to ± 30%) confirmed cost effectiveness of SBRT. Conclusion: Using a threshold of $50,000 per LYG, SBRT seems cost effective. Results require confirmation with randomized data.
机译:摘要作者表明,基于每生命年获得50,000美元的门槛,与传统的分段放疗相比,立体定向身体放疗似乎具有成本效益。简介:在25%到35%的I期早期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者中,手术不可行,外照射放射已成为他们的标准治疗方法。常规的分级放疗(CFRT)是传统的放射治疗标准。然而,立体定向放射疗法(SBRT)越来越多地被用作替代放射治疗。我们的目标是进行成本效益分析,比较公共付款系统中第一阶段NSCLC的SBRT和CFRT。方法:从公共付款方的角度,对连续患者使用2010加拿大元的直接医疗费用进行审查。还包括直接放射治疗交付费用的子集,不包括医生账单和住院费用。使用事件发生时间方法来计算以生命年为单位的生命结局(LYG)。敏感性分析确定了影响成本和收益的关键因素。结果:从2002年1月至2010年6月,共纳入168例患者(CFRT,n = 50; SBRT,n = 118)。中位随访时间为24个月。 CFRT的平均总生存期为2.83年(95%CI,1.8至4.1),SBRT的平均总生存期为3.86年(95%CI,3.2至未达到)(P = .06)。 CFRT的平均总成本为6,886美元,仅放射治疗的平均成本为5,989美元,而SBRT的平均成本分别为8,042美元和6,962美元。 SBRT与CFRT的每LYG的增量成本(增量成本效益比[ICER])对于公共支付者而言为1,120美元,对于放射治疗而言仅为942美元。单独变化的生存和人工成本(±20%)在ICER中产生了最大的变化,同时调整(±5%至±30%)确认了SBRT的成本效益。结论:使用每个LYG 50,000美元的阈值,SBRT似乎具有成本效益。结果需要使用随机数据进行确认。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号