Grann V R, Jacobson J S, Whang W, Hershman D, Heitjan D F, Antman K H, Neugut A I
Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York 10032, USA.
Cancer J Sci Am. 2000 Jan-Feb;6(1):13-20.
Recent randomized controlled trials have shown that tamoxifen and raloxifene may prevent invasive breast cancer. This decision analysis study compares the outcomes of chemoprevention with tamoxifen, raloxifene, or oral contraceptives with the outcomes of prophylactic surgery among women with high-risk BRCA1/2 mutations.
We used a simulated cohort of 30-year-old women who tested positive for BRCA1/2 mutations and constructed a Markov model with Monte Carlo simulations, incorporating cumulative breast and ovarian cancer incidence rates from the literature and survival figures from SEER data. We assumed that prophylactic surgery reduces ovarian cancer risk by 45% and breast cancer risk by 90%, that tamoxifen reduces invasive breast cancer risk by 49%, and that raloxifene has similar efficacy and safety in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. We used data obtained from high-risk women by a time trade-off questionnaire to calculate quality-adjusted life-years. We based our cost estimates for hospital and ambulatory care on Health Care Financing Administration payments, the SEER-HCFA database, and the Pharmacy Fundamental Reference.
In our model, a 30-year-old BRCA1/2+ woman could prolong survival by 0.9 years (95% probability interval, 0.4-1.2 years) by having bilateral oophorectomy, 3.4 years (2.7-3.7 years) by having bilateral mastectomy, and 4.3 years (3.6-4.6 years) by having both procedures instead of surveillance alone. Chemoprevention with tamoxifen and raloxifene increased survival by 1.6 years (1.0-2.1 years) and 2.2 years (1.3-2.8 years), respectively. Chemoprevention yielded more quality-adjusted life-years than did prophylactic surgery, even when treatment was delayed to age 40 or 50 years. All these procedures were cost-effective or cost-saving compared with surveillance alone.
Our model suggests that although surgery may yield more substantial survival and cost benefits, quality of life issues may make chemoprevention a more attractive option for young women at high genetic risk.
近期的随机对照试验表明,他莫昔芬和雷洛昔芬可能预防浸润性乳腺癌。本决策分析研究比较了他莫昔芬、雷洛昔芬或口服避孕药进行化学预防与预防性手术在携带高危BRCA1/2突变女性中的效果。
我们使用了一组30岁BRCA1/2突变检测呈阳性的模拟队列女性,构建了一个带有蒙特卡洛模拟的马尔可夫模型,纳入了文献中的累积乳腺癌和卵巢癌发病率数据以及监测、流行病学和最终结果(SEER)数据库中的生存数据。我们假设预防性手术可将卵巢癌风险降低45%,乳腺癌风险降低90%,他莫昔芬可将浸润性乳腺癌风险降低49%,且雷洛昔芬在绝经前和绝经后女性中具有相似的疗效和安全性。我们使用通过时间权衡问卷从高危女性处获得的数据来计算质量调整生命年。我们基于医疗保健财务管理局的支付数据、SEER - HCFA数据库和药房基本参考资料对医院和门诊护理的成本进行估算。
在我们的模型中,一名30岁的BRCA1/2阳性女性通过双侧卵巢切除术可延长生存期0.9年(95%概率区间为0.4 - 1.2年),通过双侧乳房切除术可延长3.4年(2.7 - 3.7年),通过同时进行这两种手术而非单纯监测可延长4.3年(3.6 - 4.6年)。他莫昔芬和雷洛昔芬化学预防分别使生存期延长1.6年(1.0 - 2.1年)和2.2年(1.3 - 2.8年)。即使将治疗推迟到40岁或50岁,化学预防产生的质量调整生命年也比预防性手术更多。与单纯监测相比,所有这些手术都是具有成本效益的或节省成本的。
我们的模型表明,尽管手术可能带来更显著的生存和成本效益,但生活质量问题可能使化学预防成为高遗传风险年轻女性更具吸引力的选择。