Institute for Onco-Physics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.
Radiat Oncol. 2021 Jan 21;16(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s13014-021-01745-1.
Proton therapy is a promising advancement in radiation oncology especially in terms of reducing normal tissue toxicity, although it is currently expensive and of limited availability. Here we estimated the individual quality of life benefit and cost-effectiveness of proton therapy in patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT), as a decision-making tool for treatment individualization.
Normal tissue complication probability models were used to estimate the risk of dysphagia, esophagitis, hypothyroidism, xerostomia and oral mucositis for 33 patients, comparing delivered photon intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) plans to intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost were calculated for each complication while accounting for patient-specific conditional survival probability and assigning quality-adjustment factors based on complication severity. Cost-effectiveness was modeled based on upfront costs of IMPT and IMRT, and the cost of acute and/or long-term management of treatment complications. Uncertainties in all model parameters and sensitivity analyses were included through Monte Carlo sampling.
The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) showed considerable variability in the cost of QALYs spared between patients, with median $361,405/QALY for all patients, varying from $54,477/QALY to $1,508,845/QALY between individual patients. Proton therapy was more likely to be cost-effective for patients with p16-positive tumors ($234,201/QALY), compared to p16-negative tumors ($516,297/QALY). For patients with p16-positive tumors treated with comprehensive nodal irradiation, proton therapy is estimated to be cost-effective in ≥ 50% of sampled cases for 8/9 patients at $500,000/QALY, compared to 6/24 patients who either have p16-negative tumors or receive unilateral neck irradiation.
Proton therapy cost-effectiveness varies greatly among oropharyngeal cancer patients, and highlights the importance of individualized decision-making. Although the upfront cost, societal willingness to pay and healthcare administration can vary greatly among different countries, identifying patients for whom proton therapy will have the greatest benefit can optimize resource allocation and inform prospective clinical trial design.
质子治疗是放射肿瘤学的一项有前途的进展,特别是在降低正常组织毒性方面,尽管目前它的价格昂贵且供应有限。在这里,我们估计了在接受根治性放射治疗(RT)的口咽癌患者中质子治疗的个体生活质量获益和成本效益,作为治疗个体化的决策工具。
使用正常组织并发症概率模型来估计 33 名患者接受光子调强放射治疗(IMRT)计划与调强质子治疗(IMPT)计划相比发生吞咽困难、食管炎、甲状腺功能减退、口干和口腔黏膜炎的风险。在考虑到患者特定的条件生存概率并根据并发症严重程度分配质量调整因素的情况下,计算了每种并发症导致的质量调整生命年(QALY)损失。成本效益通过质子治疗和调强放射治疗的前期成本建模,并考虑了治疗并发症的急性和/或长期管理成本。通过蒙特卡罗抽样包括了所有模型参数和敏感性分析的不确定性。
增量成本效益比(ICER)显示了患者之间节省的 QALY 成本的巨大差异,所有患者的中位数为 361405 美元/QALY,从每位患者的 54477 美元/QALY 到 1508845 美元/QALY 不等。对于 p16 阳性肿瘤患者,质子治疗更有可能具有成本效益(234201 美元/QALY),而对于 p16 阴性肿瘤患者(516297 美元/QALY)则不然。对于接受综合淋巴结照射的 p16 阳性肿瘤患者,质子治疗在 8/9 例患者中估计在 500000 美元/QALY 的情况下具有成本效益,而在 6/24 例 p16 阴性肿瘤或接受单侧颈部照射的患者中则不具有成本效益。
质子治疗的成本效益在口咽癌患者中差异很大,突出了个体化决策的重要性。尽管不同国家的前期成本、社会意愿支付和医疗保健管理可能有很大差异,但确定质子治疗将使哪些患者获益最大可以优化资源分配并为前瞻性临床试验设计提供信息。