Is the progression free survival advantage of concurrent gemcitabine plus cisplatin and radiation followed by adjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced cervical cancer worth the additional cost? A cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to determine whether concurrent and adjuvant chemoradiation with gemcitabine/cisplatin is cost-effective in patients with stage IIB to IVA cervical cancer.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness model compared two arms of the trial performed by Duenas-Gonzalez et al. [1]: concurrent and adjuvant chemoradiation with gemcitabine/cisplatin (RT/GC+GC) versus concurrent radiation with cisplatin (RT/C). Major adverse events (AEs) and progression free survival (PFS) rates of each arm were incorporated in the model. AEs were defined as any hospitalization including grade 4 anemia, grade 4 neutropenia, and death. Medicare data and literature review were used to estimate costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per progression-free life-year saved (PF-LYS) were calculated. Sensitivity analyses were performed for pertinent uncertainties.

RESULTS

For 10,000 women with locally advanced cervical cancer, the cost of therapy and AEs was $173.9 million (M) for RT/C versus $259.8M for RT/GC+GC. There were 879 additional 3-year progression-free survivors in the RT/GC+GC arm. The ICER for RT/GC+GC was $97,799 per PF-LYS. When the rate of hospitalization was equalized to 4.3%, the ICER for RT/GC+GC exceeded $80,000. The resultant ICER when increasing PFS in the RT/GC+GC arm by 5% was $62,605 per PF-LYS. When the cost of chemotherapy was decreased by 50%, the ICER was below $50,000 at $41,774 per PF-LYS.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiation and gemcitabine/cisplatin for patients with stage IIB to IVA cervical cancer are not cost-effective. The increased financial burden of radiation with gemcitabine/cisplatin and associated toxicities appears to outweigh the benefit of increased 3-year PFS and is primarily dependent on chemotherapy drug costs.