Avoiding Radical Surgery in Elderly Patients With Rectal Cancer Is Cost-Effective.
other · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 27926555.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Radical surgery is associated with significant perioperative mortality in elderly and comorbid populations. Emerging data suggest for patients with a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy that a watch-and-wait approach may provide equivalent survival and oncological outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of watch and wait and radical surgery for patients with rectal cancer after a clinical complete response following chemoradiotherapy. Decision analytical modeling and a Markov simulation were used to model long-term costs, quality-adjusted life-years, and cost-effectiveness after watch and wait and radical surgery. Sensitivity analysis was used to investigate the effect of uncertainty in model parameters. A third-party payer perspective was adopted. Patients included in the study were a 60-year-old male cohort with no comorbidities, 80-year-old male cohorts with no comorbidities, and 80-year-old male cohorts with significant comorbidities. Radical surgery and watch-and-wait approaches were studied. Incremental cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness ratio over the entire lifetime of the hypothetical patient cohorts were measured. Watch and wait was more effective (60-year-old male cohort with no comorbidities = 0.63 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI, 2.48-3.65 quality-adjusted life-years); 80-year-old male cohort with no comorbidities = 0.56 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI, 0.52-1.59 quality-adjusted life-years); 80-year-old male cohort with significant comorbidities = 0.72 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI, 0.34-1.76 quality-adjusted life-years)) and less costly (60-year-old male cohort with no comorbidities = $11,332.35 (95% CI, $668.50-$23,970.20); 80-year-old male cohort with no comorbidities = $8783.93 (95% CI, $2504.26-$21,900.66); 80-year-old male cohort with significant comorbidities = $10,206.01 (95% CI, $2762.014-$24,135.31)) independent of patient cohort age and comorbidity. Consequently, watch and wait was more cost-effective with a high degree of certainty (range, 69.6%-89.2%) at a threshold of $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year. Long-term outcomes were derived from modeled cohorts. Analysis was performed for a United Kingdom third-party payer perspective, limiting generalizability to other healthcare contexts. Watch and wait is likely to be cost-effective compared with radical surgery. These findings strongly support the discussion of organ-preserving strategies with suitable patients.
Medical subject headings
- Chemoradiotherapy
- Digestive System Surgical Procedures
- Neoadjuvant Therapy
- Quality-Adjusted Life Years
- Rectal Neoplasms
- Watchful Waiting