Cost-effectiveness analysis of stereotactic body radiotherapy and radiofrequency ablation for medically inoperable, early-stage non-small cell lung cancer

David J. Sher, Jon O. Wee, Rinaa S. Punglia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

49 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The standard management of medically inoperable Stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) conventionally has been fractionated three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). The relatively poor local control rate and inconvenience associated with this therapy have prompted the development of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), a technique that delivers very high doses of irradiation typically over 3 to 5 sessions. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has also been investigated as a less costly, single-day therapy that thermally ablates small, peripheral tumors. The cost-effectiveness of these three techniques has never been compared. Methods and Materials: We developed a Markov model to describe health states of 65-year-old men with medically inoperable NSCLC after treatment with 3D-CRT, SBRT, and RFA. Given their frail state, patients were assumed to receive supportive care after recurrence. Utility values, recurrence risks, and costs were adapted from the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to model uncertainty in these parameters. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SBRT over 3D-CRT was $6,000/quality-adjusted life-year, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SBRT over RFA was $14,100/ quality-adjusted life-year. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust across a range of tumor sizes, patient utility values, and costs. This result was confirmed with probabilistic sensitivity analyses that varied local control rates and utilities. Conclusion: In comparison to 3D-CRT and RFA, SBRT was the most cost-effective treatment for medically inoperable NSCLC over a wide range of treatment and disease assumptions. On the basis of efficacy and cost, SBRT should be the primary treatment approach for this disease.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume81
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2011

Fingerprint

cost effectiveness
Radiosurgery
Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
lungs
ablation
Cost-Benefit Analysis
radiation therapy
cancer
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
costs
Costs and Cost Analysis
therapy
tumors
Therapeutics
Recurrence
sensitivity
Health Care Costs
sensitivity analysis
Uncertainty
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Cost-effectiveness analysis
  • Inoperable lung cancer
  • Stereotactic radiation therapy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiation
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

@article{850b268be4524988a26672f0205c18d7,
title = "Cost-effectiveness analysis of stereotactic body radiotherapy and radiofrequency ablation for medically inoperable, early-stage non-small cell lung cancer",
abstract = "Purpose: The standard management of medically inoperable Stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) conventionally has been fractionated three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). The relatively poor local control rate and inconvenience associated with this therapy have prompted the development of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), a technique that delivers very high doses of irradiation typically over 3 to 5 sessions. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has also been investigated as a less costly, single-day therapy that thermally ablates small, peripheral tumors. The cost-effectiveness of these three techniques has never been compared. Methods and Materials: We developed a Markov model to describe health states of 65-year-old men with medically inoperable NSCLC after treatment with 3D-CRT, SBRT, and RFA. Given their frail state, patients were assumed to receive supportive care after recurrence. Utility values, recurrence risks, and costs were adapted from the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to model uncertainty in these parameters. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SBRT over 3D-CRT was $6,000/quality-adjusted life-year, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SBRT over RFA was $14,100/ quality-adjusted life-year. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust across a range of tumor sizes, patient utility values, and costs. This result was confirmed with probabilistic sensitivity analyses that varied local control rates and utilities. Conclusion: In comparison to 3D-CRT and RFA, SBRT was the most cost-effective treatment for medically inoperable NSCLC over a wide range of treatment and disease assumptions. On the basis of efficacy and cost, SBRT should be the primary treatment approach for this disease.",
keywords = "Cost-effectiveness analysis, Inoperable lung cancer, Stereotactic radiation therapy",
author = "Sher, {David J.} and Wee, {Jon O.} and Punglia, {Rinaa S.}",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.074",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "81",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness analysis of stereotactic body radiotherapy and radiofrequency ablation for medically inoperable, early-stage non-small cell lung cancer

AU - Sher, David J.

AU - Wee, Jon O.

AU - Punglia, Rinaa S.

PY - 2011/12/1

Y1 - 2011/12/1

N2 - Purpose: The standard management of medically inoperable Stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) conventionally has been fractionated three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). The relatively poor local control rate and inconvenience associated with this therapy have prompted the development of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), a technique that delivers very high doses of irradiation typically over 3 to 5 sessions. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has also been investigated as a less costly, single-day therapy that thermally ablates small, peripheral tumors. The cost-effectiveness of these three techniques has never been compared. Methods and Materials: We developed a Markov model to describe health states of 65-year-old men with medically inoperable NSCLC after treatment with 3D-CRT, SBRT, and RFA. Given their frail state, patients were assumed to receive supportive care after recurrence. Utility values, recurrence risks, and costs were adapted from the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to model uncertainty in these parameters. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SBRT over 3D-CRT was $6,000/quality-adjusted life-year, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SBRT over RFA was $14,100/ quality-adjusted life-year. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust across a range of tumor sizes, patient utility values, and costs. This result was confirmed with probabilistic sensitivity analyses that varied local control rates and utilities. Conclusion: In comparison to 3D-CRT and RFA, SBRT was the most cost-effective treatment for medically inoperable NSCLC over a wide range of treatment and disease assumptions. On the basis of efficacy and cost, SBRT should be the primary treatment approach for this disease.

AB - Purpose: The standard management of medically inoperable Stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) conventionally has been fractionated three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). The relatively poor local control rate and inconvenience associated with this therapy have prompted the development of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), a technique that delivers very high doses of irradiation typically over 3 to 5 sessions. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has also been investigated as a less costly, single-day therapy that thermally ablates small, peripheral tumors. The cost-effectiveness of these three techniques has never been compared. Methods and Materials: We developed a Markov model to describe health states of 65-year-old men with medically inoperable NSCLC after treatment with 3D-CRT, SBRT, and RFA. Given their frail state, patients were assumed to receive supportive care after recurrence. Utility values, recurrence risks, and costs were adapted from the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to model uncertainty in these parameters. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SBRT over 3D-CRT was $6,000/quality-adjusted life-year, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SBRT over RFA was $14,100/ quality-adjusted life-year. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust across a range of tumor sizes, patient utility values, and costs. This result was confirmed with probabilistic sensitivity analyses that varied local control rates and utilities. Conclusion: In comparison to 3D-CRT and RFA, SBRT was the most cost-effective treatment for medically inoperable NSCLC over a wide range of treatment and disease assumptions. On the basis of efficacy and cost, SBRT should be the primary treatment approach for this disease.

KW - Cost-effectiveness analysis

KW - Inoperable lung cancer

KW - Stereotactic radiation therapy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053040725&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053040725&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.074

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.074

M3 - Article

C2 - 21300476

AN - SCOPUS:80053040725

VL - 81

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

IS - 5

ER -