Investigator
Magee Womens Hospital
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Tumor Testing for BRCA Pathogenic Variants in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
Objectives: Approximately 15% of women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) have a germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant. Genetic testing for BRCA is recommended for all EOC patients, but not routinely performed. This study estimates the cost-effectiveness of BRCA screening with primary tumor testing versus routine germline testing. Methods: The model used literature-based probability estimates and published cost data. Effectiveness was the probability of testing completion for each strategy, providing cost per additional woman tested. A strategy was favored if it cost ≤$5000 per additional woman tested, reflecting costs of 100% receiving germline testing and 85% subsequently receiving tumor testing. Results: In the base case, primary tumor testing costs $3057 per additional woman tested. While more costly, primary tumor testing increased efficacy 2.67-fold with an incremental cost of $1500. In sensitivity analyses, results were most sensitive to varying testing costs. Tumor testing costs ≤$5000 per additional woman tested when individually varying all parameters through clinically plausible ranges. Primary germline testing was favored in >60% of cases (base case 30%) when it occurred. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, varying all parameters simultaneously over plausible ranges 5000 times, tumor testing cost ≤$5000 per additional woman tested in 100% of model iterations. Conclusion: Cost effectiveness data already support BRCA1/2 screening for EOC with clear implications for cancer prevention. On the basis of this model, primary tumor testing leads to a 2.67-fold increase in testing with an incremental cost of $1500, supporting this strategy as a cost-effective way to improve BRCA testing.
Prophylactic anticoagulation after minimally invasive hysterectomy for endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis
To determine our institutional rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer and to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of extended prophylactic anticoagulation after minimally invasive staging surgery for endometrial cancer. All patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer who underwent minimally invasive staging surgery from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2020 were identified retrospectively, and clinicopathologic and outcome data were obtained through chart review. Event probabilities and utility decrements were obtained through published clinical data and literature review. A decision model was created to compare 28 days of no post-operative pharmacologic prophylaxis, prophylactic enoxaparin, and prophylactic apixaban. Outcomes included no complications, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and major bleeding. We assumed a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Three of 844 patients (0.36%) had a VTE following minimally invasive staging surgery for endometrial cancer. In this model, no pharmacologic prophylaxis was less costly and more effective than prophylactic apixaban and prophylactic enoxaparin over all parameters examined. When all patients were assigned prophylaxis, prophylactic apixaban was both less costly and more effective than prophylactic enoxaparin. If the risk of DVT was ≥4.8%, prophylactic apixaban was favored over no pharmacologic prophylaxis. On Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis for the base case scenario, no pharmacologic prophylaxis was favored in 41.1% of iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY. In this cost-effectiveness model, no extended pharmacologic anticoagulation was superior to extended prophylactic enoxaparin and apixaban in clinically early-stage endometrial cancer patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery. This model supports use of prophylactic apixaban for 7 days post-operatively in select patients when the risk of DVT is 4.8% or higher.
Hysterectomy with sentinel lymph node dissection in the setting of preoperative endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia and an endometrial stripe ≥20 mm: a cost-effectiveness analysis
Routine lymph node assessment in patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia is institution and surgeon-dependent without clear guidelines. We sought to determine if routine sentinel lymph node (SLN) dissection at the time of laparoscopic hysterectomy for patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia and a preoperative ultrasound with endometrial stripe ≥20 mm is cost-effective. A decision model was created to perform two cost-effectiveness analyses: (1) hysterectomy with frozen section versus hysterectomy with SLN dissection in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia and an endometrial stripe of 20 mm or greater, and (2) the same options in all patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia. Costs obtained from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and event probabilities and quality of life utility values were obtained through literature review. In the case of preoperative endometrial stripe ≥20 mm, hysterectomy with SLN dissection cost $2469 more than hysterectomy with frozen section and gained 0.010 quality adjusted life years, or $44,997/quality-adjusted life years gained. In one-way sensitivity analyses, SLN dissection remained the favored strategy at a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life years unless chronic lower extremity lymphedema after full lymphadenectomy had a likelihood <13.1% (base case value 18.1%); otherwise, SLN dissection was favored with individual variation of all other parameters over plausible ranges. When considering all patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia, hysterectomy with frozen section was favored, with results most sensitive to variation of lymphedema risk after full lymphadenectomy. Hysterectomy with SLN dissection in patients with a preoperative endometrial stripe ≥20mm on ultrasound is cost-effective when compared with hysterectomy with frozen section.
