Menon Usha, McGuire Alistair J, Raikou Maria, Ryan Andy, Davies Susan K, Burnell Matthew, Gentry-Maharaj Aleksandra, Kalsi Jatinderpal K, Singh Naveena, Amso Nazar N, Cruickshank Derek, Dobbs Stephen, Godfrey Keith, Herod Jonathan, Leeson Simon, Mould Tim, Murdoch John, Oram David, Scott Ian, Seif Mourad W, Williamson Karin, Woolas Robert, Fallowfield Lesley, Campbell Stuart, Skates Steven J, Parmar Mahesh, Jacobs Ian J
Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London W1T 7DN, UK.
LSE Health &Department of Social Policy, London School of Economics, London WC2A 2AE, UK.
Br J Cancer. 2017 Aug 22;117(5):619-627. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2017.222. Epub 2017 Jul 25.
To assess the within-trial cost-effectiveness of an NHS ovarian cancer screening (OCS) programme using data from UKCTOCS and extrapolate results based on average life expectancy.
Within-trial economic evaluation of no screening (C) vs either (1) an annual OCS programme using transvaginal ultrasound (USS) or (2) an annual ovarian cancer multimodal screening programme with serum CA125 interpreted using a risk algorithm (ROCA) and transvaginal ultrasound as a second-line test (MMS), plus comparison of lifetime extrapolation of the no screening arm and the MMS programme using both a predictive and a Markov model.
Using a CA125-ROCA cost of £20, the within-trial results show USS to be strictly dominated by MMS, with the MMS vs C comparison returning an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £91 452 per life year gained (LYG). If the CA125-ROCA unit cost is reduced to £15, the ICER becomes £77 818 per LYG. Predictive extrapolation over the expected lifetime of the UKCTOCS women returns an ICER of £30 033 per LYG, while Markov modelling produces an ICER of £46 922 per QALY.
Analysis suggests that, after accounting for the lead time required to establish full mortality benefits, a national OCS programme based on the MMS strategy quickly approaches the current NICE thresholds for cost-effectiveness when extrapolated out to lifetime as compared with the within-trial ICER estimates. Whether MMS could be recommended on economic grounds would depend on the confirmation and size of the mortality benefit at the end of an ongoing follow-up of the UKCTOCS cohort.
利用英国卵巢癌筛查(OCS)试验(UKCTOCS)的数据评估英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)卵巢癌筛查项目在试验期间的成本效益,并根据平均预期寿命推断结果。
对不进行筛查(C)与以下两种情况进行试验期间的经济学评估:(1)采用经阴道超声(USS)的年度OCS项目;(2)采用风险算法(ROCA)解读血清CA125并将经阴道超声作为二线检测的年度卵巢癌多模式筛查项目(MMS),此外还使用预测模型和马尔可夫模型对不筛查组和MMS项目的终生推断结果进行比较。
使用CA125-ROCA成本为20英镑时,试验期间结果显示USS被MMS完全占优,MMS与C比较得出每获得一个生命年(LYG)的增量成本效益比(ICER)为91452英镑。如果CA125-ROCA单位成本降至15英镑,ICER变为每LYG 77818英镑。对UKCTOCS女性预期寿命进行预测推断得出每LYG的ICER为30033英镑,而马尔可夫模型得出每质量调整生命年(QALY)的ICER为46922英镑。
分析表明,在考虑到确立全部死亡率益处所需的提前期后,与试验期间ICER估计值相比,基于MMS策略的国家OCS项目在推断至终生时很快接近当前英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)的成本效益阈值。基于经济理由是否推荐MMS将取决于UKCTOCS队列正在进行随访结束时死亡率益处的确认情况及大小。