Health Economics Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
BJOG. 2014 Mar;121(4):464-76. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12460. Epub 2013 Dec 3.
To undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis that compares positron emission tomography - computed tomography (PET-CT) imaging plus standard practice with standard practice alone in the diagnosis of recurrent or persistent cervical cancer during routine surveillance and follow-up of women who have previously been diagnosed and treated.
Model-based economic evaluation using data from a systematic review, supplemented with data from other sources, and taking a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective.
Secondary Care in England.
Women at least 3 months after the completion of treatment, with either recurrent or persistent cervical cancer.
A state transition (Markov) model was developed using TreeAge Pro 2011. The structure of the model was informed by the reviews of the trials and clinical input. In the model, two diagnostic strategies were examined. A one-way sensitivity analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and a value of information analysis were also carried out.
Cost-effectiveness based on incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).
Adding PET-CT to the current treatment strategy of clinical examination and scanning [magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and/or CT scan] during the routine surveillance and follow-up of women with recurrent or persistent cervical cancer is significantly more costly, with only a minimal increase in effectiveness. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the strategy of PET-CT as an adjunct to the standard treatment strategy that included clinical examination, MRI, and/or CT scan, compared with the usual treatment alone, was over £1 million per QALY.
The results of the current analysis suggest that use of PET-CT in the diagnosis of recurrent or persistent cervical cancer is not cost-effective. Current guidelines recommending imaging using PET-CT as a diagnostic or surveillance tool need to be reconsidered in light of these results. This study did not specifically investigate the use of PET-CT in women with symptoms and radiological suspicion of recurrence where exenteration was considered. More research in that specific area is required.
对接受过治疗的宫颈癌患者进行常规监测和随访时,比较正电子发射断层扫描-计算机断层扫描(PET-CT)加标准治疗与单独使用标准治疗在诊断复发或持续性宫颈癌中的成本效益,开展成本效益分析。
基于系统评价数据并辅以其他来源数据,采用英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)视角,建立模型进行经济评估。
英格兰二级保健。
治疗后至少 3 个月,且患有复发或持续性宫颈癌的女性。
采用 TreeAge Pro 2011 软件建立状态转移(马尔可夫)模型。模型结构由试验综述和临床输入信息决定。在模型中,考察了两种诊断策略。还进行了单因素敏感性分析、概率敏感性分析和信息价值分析。
增量成本-每质量调整生命年(QALY)的成本效益。
在常规监测和随访复发或持续性宫颈癌女性时,将 PET-CT 与目前的治疗策略(临床检查、扫描[磁共振成像(MRI)和/或 CT 扫描])结合,显著增加了成本,但效果仅有轻微增加。与单独常规治疗相比,PET-CT 作为标准治疗策略(包括临床检查、MRI 和/或 CT 扫描)的辅助手段的增量成本-效益比(ICER)超过 100 万英镑/QALY。
目前的分析结果表明,在诊断复发或持续性宫颈癌时,使用 PET-CT 并不具有成本效益。鉴于这些结果,目前推荐将 PET-CT 用于成像的指南需要重新考虑。本研究未专门调查在有复发症状和影像学怀疑、需要考虑根治性手术的女性中使用 PET-CT 的情况。需要对此特定领域进行更多研究。