BACKGROUND

Recently, active surveillance (AS) has been introduced as an alternative to early surgery (ES) for the management of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), because of its indolent features and low mortality. However, its cost effects have not been determined and the findings of current studies differ, according to each country's medical system.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to compare the cost-effectiveness of AS and ES, based on a reference case of a 40-year-old patient diagnosed with PTMC. Costs and transition probabilities were derived from previous clinical studies in Korean populations, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and net monetary benefit (NMB) were calculated. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at USD 100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to address the uncertainties in the model's variables.

RESULTS

From the base scenario, the cumulative costs and effectiveness were both higher in ES than AS. The ICER for ES, compared with AS, was USD 6,619.86/QALY, lower than the set WTP. The NMB difference between AS and ES increased across the stages (USD 5,980 at the first stage and USD 159,667 at the last stage). The ICER increased along with decreasing age and increasing cost of surgery. The higher the ES utility score and the lower that of AS, the more cost-effective ES, with WTP set at USD 30,000.

CONCLUSION

In the current Korean medical system, ES is more cost-effective than AS. ES is more cost-effective as it is diagnosed at young age and followed-up for a long time.