Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer

Background: The phase 3 NCT00793962 trial demonstrated that postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) was noninferior to conventional fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) in patients with high-risk breast cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy HFRT vs CF...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jing Yang, Shu-Nan Qi, Hui Fang, Yong-Wen Song, Jing Jin, Yue-Ping Liu, Wei-Hu Wang, Yong Yang, Yu Tang, Hua Ren, Bo Chen, Ning-Ning Lu, Yuan Tang, Ning Li, Hao Jing, Shu-Lian Wang, Ye-Xiong Li
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2021-08-01
Series:Breast
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960977621003544
id doaj-41317184a6be4c1f839eb986c924e04e
record_format Article
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Jing Yang
Shu-Nan Qi
Hui Fang
Yong-Wen Song
Jing Jin
Yue-Ping Liu
Wei-Hu Wang
Yong Yang
Yu Tang
Hua Ren
Bo Chen
Ning-Ning Lu
Yuan Tang
Ning Li
Hao Jing
Shu-Lian Wang
Ye-Xiong Li
spellingShingle Jing Yang
Shu-Nan Qi
Hui Fang
Yong-Wen Song
Jing Jin
Yue-Ping Liu
Wei-Hu Wang
Yong Yang
Yu Tang
Hua Ren
Bo Chen
Ning-Ning Lu
Yuan Tang
Ning Li
Hao Jing
Shu-Lian Wang
Ye-Xiong Li
Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer
Breast
Breast neoplasm
Cost-effectiveness
Postmastectomy radiation therapy
author_facet Jing Yang
Shu-Nan Qi
Hui Fang
Yong-Wen Song
Jing Jin
Yue-Ping Liu
Wei-Hu Wang
Yong Yang
Yu Tang
Hua Ren
Bo Chen
Ning-Ning Lu
Yuan Tang
Ning Li
Hao Jing
Shu-Lian Wang
Ye-Xiong Li
author_sort Jing Yang
title Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer
title_short Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer
title_full Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer
title_sort cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer
publisher Elsevier
series Breast
issn 1532-3080
publishDate 2021-08-01
description Background: The phase 3 NCT00793962 trial demonstrated that postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) was noninferior to conventional fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) in patients with high-risk breast cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy HFRT vs CFRT based on the NCT00793962 trial. Methods: A Markov model was adopted to synthesize the medical costs and health benefits of patients with high-risk breast cancer based on data from the NCT00793962 trial. Main outcomes were discounted lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). We employed a time-dependent horizon from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives. Model robustness was evaluated with one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: Patients receiving CFRT versus HFRT gained an incremental 0.0163 QALYs, 0.0118 QALYs and 0.0028 QALYs; meanwhile an incremental cost of $2351.92, $4978.34 and $8812.70 from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives, respectively. Thus CFRT versus HFRT yielded an ICER of $144,281.47, $420,636.10 and $3,187,955.76 per QALY from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives, respectively. HFRT could maintain a trend of >50% probabilities of cost-effectiveness below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $178,882.00 in China, while HFRT was dominant relative to CFRT, regardless of the WTP values in France and the USA. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the ICERs were most sensitive to the parameters of overall survival after radiotherapy. Conclusions: Postmastectomy HFRT could be used as a cost-effective substitute for CFRT in patients with high-risk breast cancer and should be considered in appropriately selected patients.
topic Breast neoplasm
Cost-effectiveness
Postmastectomy radiation therapy
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960977621003544
work_keys_str_mv AT jingyang costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT shunanqi costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT huifang costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT yongwensong costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT jingjin costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT yuepingliu costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT weihuwang costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT yongyang costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT yutang costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT huaren costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT bochen costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT ningninglu costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT yuantang costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT ningli costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT haojing costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT shulianwang costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
AT yexiongli costeffectivenessofpostmastectomyhypofractionatedradiationtherapyvsconventionalfractionatedradiationtherapyforhighriskbreastcancer
_version_ 1721368979855900672
spelling doaj-41317184a6be4c1f839eb986c924e04e2021-06-21T04:23:43ZengElsevierBreast1532-30802021-08-01587279Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancerJing Yang0Shu-Nan Qi1Hui Fang2Yong-Wen Song3Jing Jin4Yue-Ping Liu5Wei-Hu Wang6Yong Yang7Yu Tang8Hua Ren9Bo Chen10Ning-Ning Lu11Yuan Tang12Ning Li13Hao Jing14Shu-Lian Wang15Ye-Xiong Li16State Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, China; Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, China; Corresponding author. National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.State Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, China; Corresponding author. State Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, No.17 Pan-jia-yuan South Lane, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100021, China.Background: The phase 3 NCT00793962 trial demonstrated that postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) was noninferior to conventional fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) in patients with high-risk breast cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy HFRT vs CFRT based on the NCT00793962 trial. Methods: A Markov model was adopted to synthesize the medical costs and health benefits of patients with high-risk breast cancer based on data from the NCT00793962 trial. Main outcomes were discounted lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). We employed a time-dependent horizon from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives. Model robustness was evaluated with one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: Patients receiving CFRT versus HFRT gained an incremental 0.0163 QALYs, 0.0118 QALYs and 0.0028 QALYs; meanwhile an incremental cost of $2351.92, $4978.34 and $8812.70 from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives, respectively. Thus CFRT versus HFRT yielded an ICER of $144,281.47, $420,636.10 and $3,187,955.76 per QALY from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives, respectively. HFRT could maintain a trend of >50% probabilities of cost-effectiveness below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $178,882.00 in China, while HFRT was dominant relative to CFRT, regardless of the WTP values in France and the USA. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the ICERs were most sensitive to the parameters of overall survival after radiotherapy. Conclusions: Postmastectomy HFRT could be used as a cost-effective substitute for CFRT in patients with high-risk breast cancer and should be considered in appropriately selected patients.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960977621003544Breast neoplasmCost-effectivenessPostmastectomy radiation therapy