The economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe: a population-based cost-of-illness study.


Journal

The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology
ISSN: 2468-1253
Titre abrégé: Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101690683

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2021
Historique:
received: 12 02 2021
revised: 21 04 2021
accepted: 26 04 2021
pubmed: 31 7 2021
medline: 31 8 2021
entrez: 30 7 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer morbidity and mortality in Europe. We aimed to ascertain the economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe using a population-based cost-of-illness approach. In this population-based cost-of-illness study, we obtained 2015 activity and costing data for colorectal cancer in 33 European countries (EUR-33) from global and national sources. Country-specific aggregate data were acquired for health-care, mortality, morbidity, and informal care costs. We calculated primary, outpatient, emergency, and hospital care, and systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) costs, as well as the costs of premature death, temporary and permanent absence from work, and unpaid informal care due to colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer health-care costs per case were compared with colorectal cancer survival and colorectal cancer personnel, equipment, and resources across EUR-33 using univariable and multivariable regression. We also compared hospital care and SACT costs against 2009 data for the 27 EU countries. The economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe in 2015 was €19·1 billion. The total non-health-care cost of €11·6 billion (60·6% of total economic burden) consisted of loss of productivity due to disability (€6·3 billion [33·0%]), premature death (€3·0 billion [15·9%]), and opportunity costs for informal carers (€2·2 billion [11·6%]). The €7·5 billion (39·4% of total economic burden) of direct health-care costs consisted of hospital care (€3·3 billion [43·4%] of health-care costs), SACT (€1·9 billion [25·6%]), and outpatient care (€1·3 billion [17·7%]), primary care (€0·7 billion [9·3%]), and emergency care (€0·3 billion [3·9%]). The mean cost for managing a patient with colorectal cancer varied widely between countries (€259-36 295). Hospital-care costs as a proportion of health-care costs varied considerably (24·1-84·8%), with a decrease of 21·2% from 2009 to 2015 in the EU. Overall, hospital care was the largest proportion (43·4%) of health-care expenditure, but pharmaceutical expenditure was far higher than hospital-care expenditure in some countries. Countries with similar gross domestic product per capita had widely varying health-care costs. In the EU, overall expenditure on pharmaceuticals increased by 213·7% from 2009 to 2015. Although the data analysed include non-homogenous sources from some countries and should be interpreted with caution, this study is the most comprehensive analysis to date of the economic burden of colorectal cancer in Europe. Overall spend on health care in some countries did not seem to correspond with patient outcomes. Spending on improving outcomes must be appropriately matched to the challenges in each country, to ensure tangible benefits. Our results have major implications for guiding policy and improving outcomes for this common malignancy. Department for Employment and Learning of Northern Ireland, Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, Health Data Research UK, and DATA-CAN.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer morbidity and mortality in Europe. We aimed to ascertain the economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe using a population-based cost-of-illness approach.
METHODS
In this population-based cost-of-illness study, we obtained 2015 activity and costing data for colorectal cancer in 33 European countries (EUR-33) from global and national sources. Country-specific aggregate data were acquired for health-care, mortality, morbidity, and informal care costs. We calculated primary, outpatient, emergency, and hospital care, and systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) costs, as well as the costs of premature death, temporary and permanent absence from work, and unpaid informal care due to colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer health-care costs per case were compared with colorectal cancer survival and colorectal cancer personnel, equipment, and resources across EUR-33 using univariable and multivariable regression. We also compared hospital care and SACT costs against 2009 data for the 27 EU countries.
FINDINGS
The economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe in 2015 was €19·1 billion. The total non-health-care cost of €11·6 billion (60·6% of total economic burden) consisted of loss of productivity due to disability (€6·3 billion [33·0%]), premature death (€3·0 billion [15·9%]), and opportunity costs for informal carers (€2·2 billion [11·6%]). The €7·5 billion (39·4% of total economic burden) of direct health-care costs consisted of hospital care (€3·3 billion [43·4%] of health-care costs), SACT (€1·9 billion [25·6%]), and outpatient care (€1·3 billion [17·7%]), primary care (€0·7 billion [9·3%]), and emergency care (€0·3 billion [3·9%]). The mean cost for managing a patient with colorectal cancer varied widely between countries (€259-36 295). Hospital-care costs as a proportion of health-care costs varied considerably (24·1-84·8%), with a decrease of 21·2% from 2009 to 2015 in the EU. Overall, hospital care was the largest proportion (43·4%) of health-care expenditure, but pharmaceutical expenditure was far higher than hospital-care expenditure in some countries. Countries with similar gross domestic product per capita had widely varying health-care costs. In the EU, overall expenditure on pharmaceuticals increased by 213·7% from 2009 to 2015.
INTERPRETATION
Although the data analysed include non-homogenous sources from some countries and should be interpreted with caution, this study is the most comprehensive analysis to date of the economic burden of colorectal cancer in Europe. Overall spend on health care in some countries did not seem to correspond with patient outcomes. Spending on improving outcomes must be appropriately matched to the challenges in each country, to ensure tangible benefits. Our results have major implications for guiding policy and improving outcomes for this common malignancy.
FUNDING
Department for Employment and Learning of Northern Ireland, Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, Health Data Research UK, and DATA-CAN.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34329626
pii: S2468-1253(21)00147-3
doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00147-3
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Multicenter Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

709-722

Subventions

Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/M016587/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Cancer Research UK
Pays : United Kingdom

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of interests RHH is an employee at Diaceutics. RA reports grants from AstraZeneca and MSD; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Merck, and Bayer; speaker fees from Amgen, Merck, and Servier; and support for attending meetings from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck. TM reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca; participation on a Pierre Fabre Independent Data Monitoring Committee and a Pfizer steering committee; and receipt of material from Almac Diagnostics, Indica labs and Psioxus. EM reports support from Cancer Focus Northern Ireland and has given advice to the Royal College of Nursing. ML reports support from MRC, Cancer Research UK, and HDRUK; an unrestricted educational grant from Pfizer; and honoraria from Pfizer, EMD Serono, and Roche unrelated to the work. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Auteurs

Raymond Hugo Henderson (RH)

Patrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK; Queen's Management School, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK; Diaceutics, Belfast, UK. Electronic address: r.henderson@qub.ac.uk.

Declan French (D)

Queen's Management School, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.

Timothy Maughan (T)

MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Richard Adams (R)

Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.

Claudia Allemani (C)

Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Pamela Minicozzi (P)

Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Michel P Coleman (MP)

Cancer Survival Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Ethna McFerran (E)

Patrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.

Richard Sullivan (R)

Institute of Cancer Policy, King's College London & King's Health Partners Comprehensive Cancer Centre, UK.

Mark Lawler (M)

Patrick G Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH