Cost-effectiveness analysis of SBRT versus IMRT: An emerging initial radiation treatment option for organ-confined prostate cancer

Joseph C. Hodges, Yair Lotan, Thomas P. Boike, Rhonda Benton, Alyson Barrier, Robert Timmerman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 external beam radiation therapy techniques for treatment of lowto intermediate-risk prostate cancer: stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and intensitymodulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Materials and Methods: A Markov decision analysis model with probabilistic sensitivity analysis was designed with the various disease states of a 70-year-old patient with organ-confined prostate cancer to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 2 external beam radiation treatment options. Results: The Monte Carlo simulation revealed that the mean cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for SBRT and IMRT were $22,152 and 7.9 years and $35,431 and 7.9 years, respectively. The sensitivity analysis revealed that if the SBRT cohort experienced a decrease in quality of life of 4% or a decrease in efficacy of 6%, then SBRT would no longer dominate IMRT in cost-effectiveness. In fact, with these relaxed assumptions for SBRT, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMRT met the societal willingness to pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. Conclusions: Compared with IMRT, SBRT for lowto intermediate-risk prostate cancer has great potential cost savings for our healthcare system payers and may improve access to radiation, increase patient convenience, and boost quality of life for patients. Our model suggests that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMRT compared with SBRT is highly sensitive to quality-oflife outcomes, which should be adequately and comparably measured in current and future prostate SBRT studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAmerican Journal of Managed Care
Volume18
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 2012

Fingerprint

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Prostatic Neoplasms
Radiotherapy
Radiation
Therapeutics
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Quality of Life
Decision Support Techniques
Cost Savings
Statistical Models
Prostate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness analysis of SBRT versus IMRT : An emerging initial radiation treatment option for organ-confined prostate cancer. / Hodges, Joseph C.; Lotan, Yair; Boike, Thomas P.; Benton, Rhonda; Barrier, Alyson; Timmerman, Robert.

In: American Journal of Managed Care, Vol. 18, No. 5, 05.2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c74c833e19ef4528bdae8842cf924fab,
title = "Cost-effectiveness analysis of SBRT versus IMRT: An emerging initial radiation treatment option for organ-confined prostate cancer",
abstract = "Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 external beam radiation therapy techniques for treatment of lowto intermediate-risk prostate cancer: stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and intensitymodulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Materials and Methods: A Markov decision analysis model with probabilistic sensitivity analysis was designed with the various disease states of a 70-year-old patient with organ-confined prostate cancer to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 2 external beam radiation treatment options. Results: The Monte Carlo simulation revealed that the mean cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for SBRT and IMRT were $22,152 and 7.9 years and $35,431 and 7.9 years, respectively. The sensitivity analysis revealed that if the SBRT cohort experienced a decrease in quality of life of 4{\%} or a decrease in efficacy of 6{\%}, then SBRT would no longer dominate IMRT in cost-effectiveness. In fact, with these relaxed assumptions for SBRT, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMRT met the societal willingness to pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. Conclusions: Compared with IMRT, SBRT for lowto intermediate-risk prostate cancer has great potential cost savings for our healthcare system payers and may improve access to radiation, increase patient convenience, and boost quality of life for patients. Our model suggests that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMRT compared with SBRT is highly sensitive to quality-oflife outcomes, which should be adequately and comparably measured in current and future prostate SBRT studies.",
author = "Hodges, {Joseph C.} and Yair Lotan and Boike, {Thomas P.} and Rhonda Benton and Alyson Barrier and Robert Timmerman",
year = "2012",
month = "5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
journal = "American Journal of Managed Care",
issn = "1088-0224",
publisher = "Ascend Media",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness analysis of SBRT versus IMRT

T2 - An emerging initial radiation treatment option for organ-confined prostate cancer

AU - Hodges, Joseph C.

AU - Lotan, Yair

AU - Boike, Thomas P.

AU - Benton, Rhonda

AU - Barrier, Alyson

AU - Timmerman, Robert

PY - 2012/5

Y1 - 2012/5

N2 - Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 external beam radiation therapy techniques for treatment of lowto intermediate-risk prostate cancer: stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and intensitymodulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Materials and Methods: A Markov decision analysis model with probabilistic sensitivity analysis was designed with the various disease states of a 70-year-old patient with organ-confined prostate cancer to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 2 external beam radiation treatment options. Results: The Monte Carlo simulation revealed that the mean cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for SBRT and IMRT were $22,152 and 7.9 years and $35,431 and 7.9 years, respectively. The sensitivity analysis revealed that if the SBRT cohort experienced a decrease in quality of life of 4% or a decrease in efficacy of 6%, then SBRT would no longer dominate IMRT in cost-effectiveness. In fact, with these relaxed assumptions for SBRT, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMRT met the societal willingness to pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. Conclusions: Compared with IMRT, SBRT for lowto intermediate-risk prostate cancer has great potential cost savings for our healthcare system payers and may improve access to radiation, increase patient convenience, and boost quality of life for patients. Our model suggests that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMRT compared with SBRT is highly sensitive to quality-oflife outcomes, which should be adequately and comparably measured in current and future prostate SBRT studies.

AB - Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 external beam radiation therapy techniques for treatment of lowto intermediate-risk prostate cancer: stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and intensitymodulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Materials and Methods: A Markov decision analysis model with probabilistic sensitivity analysis was designed with the various disease states of a 70-year-old patient with organ-confined prostate cancer to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 2 external beam radiation treatment options. Results: The Monte Carlo simulation revealed that the mean cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for SBRT and IMRT were $22,152 and 7.9 years and $35,431 and 7.9 years, respectively. The sensitivity analysis revealed that if the SBRT cohort experienced a decrease in quality of life of 4% or a decrease in efficacy of 6%, then SBRT would no longer dominate IMRT in cost-effectiveness. In fact, with these relaxed assumptions for SBRT, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMRT met the societal willingness to pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. Conclusions: Compared with IMRT, SBRT for lowto intermediate-risk prostate cancer has great potential cost savings for our healthcare system payers and may improve access to radiation, increase patient convenience, and boost quality of life for patients. Our model suggests that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMRT compared with SBRT is highly sensitive to quality-oflife outcomes, which should be adequately and comparably measured in current and future prostate SBRT studies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84864406548&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84864406548&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 22694113

AN - SCOPUS:84864406548

VL - 18

JO - American Journal of Managed Care

JF - American Journal of Managed Care

SN - 1088-0224

IS - 5

ER -