A study comparing the cost-effectiveness of conventional and drug-eluting transarterial chemoembolisation (cTACE and DEB-TACE) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in an Australian public hospital

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Warren Clements, Abigail Chenoweth, Benjamin Phipps, Lowella Mozo, Mark Bolger, Laura Morphett, Tuan Phan, Jim Koukounaras, Matthew W Lukies
{"title":"A study comparing the cost-effectiveness of conventional and drug-eluting transarterial chemoembolisation (cTACE and DEB-TACE) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in an Australian public hospital","authors":"Warren Clements,&nbsp;Abigail Chenoweth,&nbsp;Benjamin Phipps,&nbsp;Lowella Mozo,&nbsp;Mark Bolger,&nbsp;Laura Morphett,&nbsp;Tuan Phan,&nbsp;Jim Koukounaras,&nbsp;Matthew W Lukies","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.13731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality and transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is an established technique to treat patients with intermediate-stage HCC. The aim of this study was to generate accurate costing data on cTACE and DEB-TACE in an Australian setting and assess whether one of the procedures offers favourable cost-effectiveness.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Costing study using data from all TACE procedures performed at a single centre between January 2018 and December 2022. Data were included from all direct and indirect costs including operative costs, wages, overheads, ward costs, transfusion, pathology, pharmacy and ward support. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by dividing local costs by existing high-quality data on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>64 TACE treatments were performed on 44 patients. Mean age was 66.5 years and 91% were male. Overall median total cost per patient for the entire TACE treatment regime was AUD$7380 (range AUD$3719–$20,258). However, 39% of patients received more than one treatment, and the median cost per individual treatment was AUD$5270 (range AUD$3533–$15,818). The difference in median cost between cTACE (AUD$4978) and DEB-TACE (AUD$9202) was significant, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001. In calculating cost-effectiveness, each cTACE treatment cost AUD$2489 per QALY gained, while each DEB-TACE cost AUD$3834 per QALY gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for DEB-TACE over cTACE was AUD$10,560 per QALY gained.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Both cTACE and DEB-TACE are low-cost treatments in Australia. However, DEB-TACE offers a solution with an ICER of AUD$10,560 per QALY gained which is below the Australian government willingness to pay threshold and thus is a more cost-effective treatment.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"68 6","pages":"714-720"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1754-9485.13731","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1754-9485.13731","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality and transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is an established technique to treat patients with intermediate-stage HCC. The aim of this study was to generate accurate costing data on cTACE and DEB-TACE in an Australian setting and assess whether one of the procedures offers favourable cost-effectiveness.

Methods

Costing study using data from all TACE procedures performed at a single centre between January 2018 and December 2022. Data were included from all direct and indirect costs including operative costs, wages, overheads, ward costs, transfusion, pathology, pharmacy and ward support. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by dividing local costs by existing high-quality data on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

Results

64 TACE treatments were performed on 44 patients. Mean age was 66.5 years and 91% were male. Overall median total cost per patient for the entire TACE treatment regime was AUD$7380 (range AUD$3719–$20,258). However, 39% of patients received more than one treatment, and the median cost per individual treatment was AUD$5270 (range AUD$3533–$15,818). The difference in median cost between cTACE (AUD$4978) and DEB-TACE (AUD$9202) was significant, P < 0.001. In calculating cost-effectiveness, each cTACE treatment cost AUD$2489 per QALY gained, while each DEB-TACE cost AUD$3834 per QALY gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for DEB-TACE over cTACE was AUD$10,560 per QALY gained.

Conclusion

Both cTACE and DEB-TACE are low-cost treatments in Australia. However, DEB-TACE offers a solution with an ICER of AUD$10,560 per QALY gained which is below the Australian government willingness to pay threshold and thus is a more cost-effective treatment.

Abstract Image

在澳大利亚一家公立医院进行的一项研究,比较了传统经动脉化疗栓塞术(cTACE)和药物洗脱经动脉化疗栓塞术(DEB-TACE)治疗肝细胞癌的成本效益。
简介:肝细胞癌(HCC)是癌症相关死亡的主要原因,而经动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE)是治疗中晚期 HCC 患者的成熟技术。本研究旨在为澳大利亚的 cTACE 和 DEB-TACE 提供准确的成本计算数据,并评估其中一种治疗方法是否具有更高的成本效益:成本计算研究使用的数据来自 2018 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月期间在一个中心进行的所有 TACE 手术。数据包括所有直接和间接成本,包括手术成本、工资、管理费用、病房成本、输血、病理、药房和病房支持。评估成本效益的方法是将当地成本除以现有的高质量质量调整生命年(QALYs)数据:44名患者接受了64次TACE治疗。平均年龄为 66.5 岁,91% 为男性。在整个 TACE 治疗过程中,每位患者的总费用中位数为 7380 澳元(范围在 3719 澳元至 20258 澳元之间)。不过,39% 的患者接受了一次以上的治疗,每次治疗的中位成本为 5270 澳元(范围在 3533 澳元至 15818 澳元之间)。cTACE(4978 澳元)和 DEB-TACE(9202 澳元)的中位成本差异显著,P 结论:在澳大利亚,cTACE 和 DEB-TACE 都是低成本治疗方法。然而,DEB-TACE 提供了一种解决方案,其每 QALY 收益的 ICER 为 10560 澳元,低于澳大利亚政府的支付意愿阈值,因此是一种更具成本效益的治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
133
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology (formerly Australasian Radiology) is the official journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, publishing articles of scientific excellence in radiology and radiation oncology. Manuscripts are judged on the basis of their contribution of original data and ideas or interpretation. All articles are peer reviewed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信