Comparison of Drug-Eluting Embolics versus Conventional Transarterial Chemoembolization for the Treatment of Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Antibiotics, Antineoplastic
/ administration & dosage
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular
/ drug therapy
Chemoembolization, Therapeutic
/ adverse effects
Clinical Decision-Making
Cost Savings
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Decision Support Techniques
Decision Trees
Disease Progression
Doxorubicin
/ administration & dosage
Drug Carriers
/ economics
Drug Costs
Female
Humans
Liver Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Male
Middle Aged
Models, Economic
Quality of Life
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
Journal
Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR
ISSN: 1535-7732
Titre abrégé: J Vasc Interv Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9203369
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2021
01 2021
Historique:
received:
24
02
2020
revised:
14
09
2020
accepted:
17
09
2020
pubmed:
9
11
2020
medline:
26
1
2021
entrez:
8
11
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare the cost-effectiveness of using doxorubicin-loaded drug-eluting embolic (DEE) transarterial chemoembolization versus that of using conventional transarterial chemoembolization for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A decision-analysis model was constructed over the lifespan of a payer's perspective. The model simulated the clinical course, including periprocedural complications, additional transarterial chemoembolization or other treatments (ablation, radioembolization, or systemic treatment), palliative care, and death, of patients with unresectable HCC. All clinical parameters were derived from the literature. Base case calculations, probabilistic sensitivity analyses, and multiple two-way sensitivity analyses were performed. In the base case calculations for patients with a median age of 67 years (range for conventional transarterial chemoembolization: 28-88 years, range for DEE-transarterial chemoembolization: 16-93 years), conventional transarterial chemoembolization yielded a health benefit of 2.11 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) at a cost of $125,324, whereas DEE-transarterial chemoembolization yielded 1.71 QALY for $144,816. In 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, conventional transarterial chemoembolization continued to be a more cost-effective strategy. conventional transarterial chemoembolization was cost-effective when the complication risks for both the procedures were simultaneously varied from 0% to 30%. DEE-transarterial chemoembolization became cost-effective if the conventional transarterial chemoembolization mortality exceeded that of DEE-transarterial chemoembolization by 17% in absolute values. The two-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated that conventional transarterial chemoembolization was cost-effective until the risk of disease progression was >0.4% of that for DEE-transarterial chemoembolization in absolute values. Our analysis showed that DEE-transarterial chemoembolization would be more cost-effective if it offered >2.5% higher overall survival benefit than conventional transarterial chemoembolization in absolute values. Compared with DEE-transarterial chemoembolization, conventional transarterial chemoembolization yielded a higher number of QALY at a lower cost, making it the more cost-effective of the 2 modalities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33160827
pii: S1051-0443(20)30805-8
doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2020.09.022
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibiotics, Antineoplastic
0
Drug Carriers
0
Doxorubicin
80168379AG
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2-12.e1Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 SIR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.