Health Economics Bristol (HEB), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West at University Hospitals Bristol, Bristol, BS1 2NT, UK.
BMC Cancer. 2020 Oct 7;20(1):971. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07276-4.
Optimal management strategies for clinically localised prostate cancer are debated. Using median 10-year data from the largest randomised controlled trial to date (ProtecT), the lifetime cost-effectiveness of three major treatments (radical radiotherapy, radical prostatectomy and active monitoring) was explored according to age and risk subgroups.
A decision-analytic (Markov) model was developed and informed by clinical input. The economic evaluation adopted a UK NHS perspective and the outcome was cost per Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained (reported in UK£), estimated using EQ-5D-3L.
Costs and QALYs extrapolated over the lifetime were mostly similar between the three randomised strategies and their subgroups, but with some important differences. Across all analyses, active monitoring was associated with higher costs, probably associated with higher rates of metastatic disease and changes to radical treatments. When comparing the value of the strategies (QALY gains and costs) in monetary terms, for both low-risk prostate cancer subgroups, radiotherapy generated the greatest net monetary benefit (£293,446 [95% CI £282,811 to £299,451] by D'Amico and £292,736 [95% CI £284,074 to £297,719] by Grade group 1). However, the sensitivity analysis highlighted uncertainty in the finding when stratified by Grade group, as radiotherapy had 53% probability of cost-effectiveness and prostatectomy had 43%. In intermediate/high risk groups, using D'Amico and Grade group > = 2, prostatectomy generated the greatest net monetary benefit (£275,977 [95% CI £258,630 to £285,474] by D'Amico and £271,933 [95% CI £237,864 to £287,784] by Grade group). This finding was supported by the sensitivity analysis. Prostatectomy had the greatest net benefit (£290,487 [95% CI £280,781 to £296,281]) for men younger than 65 and radical radiotherapy (£201,311 [95% CI £195,161 to £205,049]) for men older than 65, but sensitivity analysis showed considerable uncertainty in both findings.
Over the lifetime, extrapolating from the ProtecT trial, radical radiotherapy and prostatectomy appeared to be cost-effective for low risk prostate cancer, and radical prostatectomy for intermediate/high risk prostate cancer, but there was uncertainty in some estimates. Longer ProtecT trial follow-up is required to reduce uncertainty in the model.
Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN20141297: http://isrctn.org (14/10/2002); ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02044172: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (23/01/2014).
对于局限性前列腺癌的最佳治疗策略存在争议。本研究使用迄今为止最大的随机对照试验(ProtecT)的中位 10 年数据,根据年龄和风险亚组探讨了三种主要治疗方法(根治性放疗、根治性前列腺切除术和主动监测)的终生成本效益。
开发了一种决策分析(Markov)模型,并通过临床输入进行了信息补充。该经济评估采用英国国民健康保险制度(NHS)的观点,使用 EQ-5D-3L 估计获得的质量调整生命年(QALY)的成本(以英镑报告)。
在终生期间,三种随机治疗策略及其亚组的成本和 QALY 大多相似,但也存在一些重要差异。在所有分析中,主动监测与更高的成本相关,这可能与转移性疾病的更高发生率以及对根治性治疗的改变有关。在比较策略(QALY 收益和成本)的货币价值时,对于低危前列腺癌亚组,放疗在 D'Amico 分组中产生的净货币效益最高(293446 英镑[95%CI 282811 至 299451]),在 Grade 分组 1 中为 292736 英镑(95%CI 284074 至 297719)。然而,敏感性分析强调了当按 Grade 分组分层时,该发现存在不确定性,因为放疗的成本效益比为 53%,前列腺切除术为 43%。在中高危组中,使用 D'Amico 和 Grade 分组≥2,前列腺切除术在 D'Amico 分组中产生的净货币效益最高(275977 英镑[95%CI 258630 至 285474]),在 Grade 分组中为 271933 英镑(95%CI 237864 至 287784)。敏感性分析支持了这一发现。对于年龄小于 65 岁的男性,前列腺切除术的净效益最高(290487 英镑[95%CI 280781 至 296281]),对于年龄大于 65 岁的男性,根治性放疗的净效益最高(201311 英镑[95%CI 195161 至 205049]),但敏感性分析表明这两个发现都存在相当大的不确定性。
从 ProtecT 试验推断,在一生中,根治性放疗和前列腺切除术对于低危前列腺癌似乎具有成本效益,而根治性前列腺切除术对于中高危前列腺癌具有成本效益,但某些估计存在不确定性。需要更长时间的 ProtecT 试验随访以减少模型中的不确定性。
当前对照试验编号,ISRCTN86344539:http://isrctn.org(2002 年 10 月 14 日);临床试验.gov 编号,NCT02044172:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov(2014 年 1 月 23 日)。