Massachusetts General Hospital, 101 Merrimac Street, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114.
Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2014 Mar;7(3):341-50. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-13-0191-T. Epub 2013 Dec 31.
Data suggest that aspirin, statins, or a combination of the two drugs may lower the progression of Barrett's esophagus to esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, aspirin is associated with potential complications such as gastrointestinal bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke, and statins are associated with myopathy. We developed a simulation disease model to study the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of aspirin and statin chemoprevention against esophageal adenocarcinoma. A decision analytic Markov model was constructed to compare four strategies for Barrett's esophagus management; all regimens included standard endoscopic surveillance regimens: (i) endoscopic surveillance alone, (ii) aspirin therapy, (iii) statin therapy, and (iv) combination therapy of aspirin and statin. Endpoints evaluated were life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALY), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the impact of model input uncertainty on results. Assuming an annual progression rate of 0.33% per year from Barrett's esophagus to esophageal adenocarcinoma, aspirin therapy was more effective and cost less than (dominated) endoscopic surveillance alone. When combination therapy was compared with aspirin therapy, the ICER was $158,000/QALY, which was above our willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Statin therapy was dominated by combination therapy. When higher annual cancer progression rates were assumed in the model (0.5% per year), combination therapy was cost-effective compared with aspirin therapy, producing an ICER of $96,000/QALY. In conclusion, aspirin chemoprevention was both more effective and cost less than endoscopic surveillance alone. Combination therapy using both aspirin and statin is expensive but could be cost-effective in patients at higher risk of progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma.
数据表明,阿司匹林、他汀类药物或两者联合使用可能会降低巴雷特食管向食管腺癌的进展速度。然而,阿司匹林可能会引起胃肠道出血和出血性中风等潜在并发症,而他汀类药物则可能引起肌肉疾病。我们开发了一种模拟疾病模型,以研究阿司匹林和他汀类药物化学预防对食管腺癌的有效性和成本效益。构建了一个决策分析马尔可夫模型,以比较四种巴雷特食管管理策略;所有方案均包括标准内镜监测方案:(i)单独内镜监测,(ii)阿司匹林治疗,(iii)他汀类药物治疗,以及(iv)阿司匹林和他汀类药物联合治疗。评估的终点是预期寿命、质量调整生命年(QALY)、成本和增量成本效益比(ICER)。进行敏感性分析以确定模型输入不确定性对结果的影响。假设从巴雷特食管到食管腺癌的每年进展率为 0.33%,阿司匹林治疗比单独内镜监测更有效且成本更低。当联合治疗与阿司匹林治疗相比时,ICER 为 158,000 美元/QALY,高于我们 100,000 美元/QALY 的支付意愿阈值。他汀类药物治疗优于联合治疗。当模型中假设更高的每年癌症进展率(每年 0.5%)时,与阿司匹林治疗相比,联合治疗具有成本效益,ICER 为 96,000 美元/QALY。总之,阿司匹林化学预防比单独内镜监测更有效且成本更低。阿司匹林和他汀类药物联合使用的联合治疗虽然昂贵,但对于进展为食管腺癌风险较高的患者可能具有成本效益。