Search

PurposeDespite multiple randomized trials showing the efficacy of hypofractionated radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer, the United States has been slow to adopt this treatment. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of individual radiation oncologists on the early adoption of hypofractionated radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer.MethodsWe identified 22,233 Medicare beneficiaries with localized breast cancer that was diagnosed from 2004 to 2011 who underwent breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiation. Multilevel, multivariable logistic models clustered by radiation oncologist and geographic practice area were used to determine the impact of the provider and geographic region on the likelihood of receiving hypofractionated compared with standard fractionated radiation therapy while controlling for a patient's clinical and demographic covariates. Odds ratios (OR) describe the impact of demographic or clinical covariates, and the median OR (MOR) describes the relative impact of the individual radiation oncologist and geographic region on the likelihood of undergoing hypofractionated radiation therapy.ResultsAmong the entire cohort, 2333 women (10.4%) were treated with hypofractionated radiation therapy, with unadjusted rates ranging from 0.0% in the bottom quintile of radiation oncologists to 30.4% in the top quintile. Multivariable analysis found that the individual radiation oncologist (MOR 3.08) had a greater impact on the use of hypofractionation than did geographic region (MOR 2.10) or clinical and demographic variables. The impact of the provider increased from the year 2004 to 2005 (MOR 2.82) to the year 2010 to 2011 (MOR 3.16) despite the publication of long-term randomized trial results in early 2010. Male physician and radiation oncologists treating the highest volume of breast cancer patients were less likely to perform hypofractionation (P

BackgroundAbout 10-15% of adult, and most pediatric, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) lack mutations in KIT, PDGFRA, SDHx, or RAS pathway components (KRAS, BRAF, NF1). The identification of additional mutated genes in this rare subset of tumors can have important clinical benefit to identify altered biological pathways and select targeted therapies.MethodsWe performed comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) for coding regions in more than 300 cancer-related genes of 186 GISTs to assess for their somatic alterations.ResultsWe identified 24 GIST lacking alterations in the canonical KIT/PDGFRA/RAS pathways, including 12 without SDHx alterations. These 24 patients were mostly adults (96%). The tumors had a 46% rate of nodal metastases. These 24 GIST were more commonly mutated at 7 genes: ARID1B, ATR, FGFR1, LTK, SUFU, PARK2 and ZNF217. Two tumors harbored FGFR1 gene fusions (FGFR1-HOOK3, FGFR1-TACC1) and one harbored an ETV6-NTRK3 fusion that responded to TRK inhibition. In an independent sample set, we identified 5 GIST cases lacking alterations in the KIT/PDGFRA/SDHx/RAS pathways, including two additional cases with FGFR1-TACC1 and ETV6-NTRK3 fusions.ConclusionsUsing patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and CGP, we show that GIST lacking alterations in canonical genes occur in younger patients, frequently metastasize to lymph nodes, and most contain deleterious genomic alterations, including gene fusions involving FGFR1 and NTRK3. If confirmed in larger series, routine testing for these translocations may be indicated for this subset of GIST. Moreover, these findings can be used to guide personalized treatments for patients with GIST. Trial registration NCT 02576431. Registered October 12, 2015.

Purpose Recently, a large randomized trial found a survival advantage among patients who received elective neck dissection in conjunction with primary surgery for clinically node-negative oral cavity cancer compared with those receiving primary surgery alone. However, elective neck dissection comes with greater upfront cost and patient morbidity. We present a cost-effectiveness analysis of elective neck dissection for the initial surgical management of early-stage oral cavity cancer. Methods We constructed a Markov model to simulate primary, adjuvant, and salvage therapy; disease recurrence; and survival in patients with T1/T2 clinically node-negative oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. Transition probabilities were derived from clinical trial data; costs (in 2015 US dollars) and health utilities were estimated from the literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, expressed as dollar per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), were calculated with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios less than $100,000/QALY considered cost effective. We conducted one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to examine model uncertainty. Results Our base-case model found that over a lifetime the addition of elective neck dissection to primary surgery reduced overall costs by $6,000 and improved effectiveness by 0.42 QALYs compared with primary surgery alone. The decrease in overall cost despite the added neck dissection was a result of less use of salvage therapy. On one-way sensitivity analysis, the model was most sensitive to assumptions about disease recurrence, survival, and the health utility reduction from a neck dissection. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that treatment with elective neck dissection was cost effective 76% of the time at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Conclusion Our study found that the addition of elective neck dissection reduces costs and improves health outcomes, making this a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with early-stage oral cavity cancer.

PURPOSE: The quality of radiotherapy auto-segmentation training data, primarily derived from clinician observers, is of utmost importance. However, the factors influencing the quality of clinician-derived segmentations are poorly understood; our study aims to quantify these factors. METHODS: Organ at risk (OAR) and tumor-related segmentations provided by radiation oncologists from the Contouring Collaborative for Consensus in Radiation Oncology data set were used. Segmentations were derived from five disease sites: breast, sarcoma, head and neck (H&N), gynecologic (GYN), and GI. Segmentation quality was determined on a structure-by-structure basis by comparing the observer segmentations with an expert-derived consensus, which served as a reference standard benchmark. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) was primarily used as a metric for the comparisons. DSC was stratified into binary groups on the basis of structure-specific expert-derived interobserver variability (IOV) cutoffs. Generalized linear mixed-effects models using Bayesian estimation were used to investigate the association between demographic variables and the binarized DSC for each disease site. Variables with a highest density interval excluding zero were considered to substantially affect the outcome measure. RESULTS: Five hundred seventy-four, 110, 452, 112, and 48 segmentations were used for the breast, sarcoma, H&N, GYN, and GI cases, respectively. The median percentage of segmentations that crossed the expert DSC IOV cutoff when stratified by structure type was 55% and 31% for OARs and tumors, respectively. Regression analysis revealed that the structure being tumor-related had a substantial negative impact on binarized DSC for the breast, sarcoma, H&N, and GI cases. There were no recurring relationships between segmentation quality and demographic variables across the cases, with most variables demonstrating large standard deviations. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights substantial uncertainty surrounding conventionally presumed factors influencing segmentation quality relative to benchmarks. Common radiation oncologist demographic factors are not associated with segmentation performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundAlthough married cancer patients have more favorable survival than unmarried patients, reasons underlying this association are not fully understood. The authors evaluated the role of economic resources, including health insurance status and neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES), in a large California cohort.MethodsFrom the California Cancer Registry, we identified 783,167 cancer patients (386,607 deaths) who were diagnosed during 2000 through 2009 with a first primary, invasive cancer of the 10 most common sites of cancer-related death for each sex and were followed through 2012. Age-stratified and stage-stratified Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for all-cause mortality associated with marital status, adjusted for cancer site, race/ethnicity, and treatment.ResultsCompared with married patients, unmarried patients had an elevated risk of mortality that was higher among males (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.26-1.29) than among females (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.18-1.20; Pinteraction < .001). Adjustment for insurance status and nSES reduced the marital status HRs to 1.22 for males and 1.15 for females. There was some evidence of synergistic effects of marital status, insurance, and nSES, with relatively higher risks observed for unmarried status among those who were under-insured and living in high nSES areas compared with those who were under-insured and living in low nSES areas (Pinteraction = 6.8 × 10(-9) among males and 8.2 × 10(-8) among females).ConclusionsThe worse survival of unmarried than married cancer patients appears to be minimally explained by differences in economic resources. Cancer 2016;122:1618-25. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

BackgroundIt has been observed that married cancer patients have lower mortality rates than unmarried patients, but data for different racial/ethnic groups are scarce. The authors examined the risk of overall mortality associated with marital status across racial/ethnic groups and sex in data from the California Cancer Registry.MethodsCalifornia Cancer Registry data for all first primary invasive cancers diagnosed from 2000 through 2009 for the 10 most common sites of cancer-related death for non-Hispanic whites (NHWs), blacks, Asians/Pacific Islanders (APIs), and Hispanics were used to estimate multivariable hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for marital status in relation to overall mortality by race/ethnicity and sex. The study cohort included 393,470 male and 389,697 female cancer patients and 204,007 and 182,600 deaths from all causes, respectively, through December 31, 2012.ResultsAll-cause mortality was higher in unmarried patients than in married patients, but there was significant variation by race/ethnicity. Adjusted HRs (95% CIs) ranged from 1.24 (95% CI, 1.23-1.26) in NHWs to 1.11 (95% CI, 1.07-1.15) in APIs among males and from 1.17 (95% CI, 1.15-1.18) in NHWs to 1.07 (95% CI, 1.04-1.11) in APIs among females. All-cause mortality associated with unmarried status compared with married status was higher in US-born API and Hispanic men and women relative to their foreign-born counterparts.ConclusionsFor patients who have the cancers that contribute most to mortality, being unmarried is associated with worse overall survival compared with being married, with up to 24% higher mortality among NHW males but only 6% higher mortality among foreign-born Hispanic and API females. Future research should pursue the identification of factors underlying these associations to inform targeted interventions for unmarried cancer patients. Cancer 2016;122:1570-8. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

PurposeTo compare a novel generalized competing event (GCE) model versus the standard Cox proportional hazards regression model for stratifying elderly patients with cancer who are at risk for competing events.MethodsWe identified 84,319 patients with nonmetastatic prostate, head and neck, and breast cancers from the SEER-Medicare database. Using demographic, tumor, and clinical characteristics, we trained risk scores on the basis of GCE versus Cox models for cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. In test sets, we examined the predictive ability of the risk scores on the different causes of death, including second cancer mortality, noncancer mortality, and cause-specific mortality, using Fine-Gray regression and area under the curve. We compared how well models stratified subpopulations according to the ratio of the cumulative cause-specific hazard for cancer mortality to the cumulative hazard for overall mortality (ω) using the Akaike Information Criterion.ResultsIn each sample, increasing GCE risk scores were associated with increased cancer-specific mortality and decreased competing mortality, whereas risk scores from Cox models were associated with both increased cancer-specific mortality and competing mortality. GCE models created greater separation in the area under the curve for cancer-specific mortality versus noncancer mortality (P < .001), indicating better discriminatory ability between these events. Comparing the GCE model to Cox models of cause-specific mortality or all-cause mortality, the respective Akaike Information Criterion scores were superior (lower) in each sample: prostate cancer, 28.6 versus 35.5 versus 39.4; head and neck cancer, 21.1 versus 29.4 versus 40.2; and breast cancer, 24.6 versus 32.3 versus 50.8.ConclusionCompared with standard modeling approaches, GCE models improve stratification of elderly patients with cancer according to their risk of dying from cancer relative to overall mortality.

PurposeOver the past decade, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has replaced conventional radiation techniques in the management of head-and-neck cancers (HNCs). We conducted this population-based study to evaluate the influence of radiation oncologist experience on outcomes in patients with HNC treated with IMRT compared with patients with HNC treated with conventional radiation therapy.MethodsWe identified radiation providers from Medicare claims of 6,212 Medicare beneficiaries with HNC treated between 2000 and 2009. We analyzed the impact of provider volume on all-cause mortality, HNC mortality, and toxicity end points after treatment with either conventional radiation therapy or IMRT. All analyses were performed by using either multivariable Cox proportional hazards or Fine-Gray regression models controlling for potential confounding variables.ResultsAmong patients treated with conventional radiation, we found no significant relationship between provider volume and patient survival or any toxicity end point. Among patients receiving IMRT, those treated by higher-volume radiation oncologists had improved survival compared with those treated by low-volume providers. The risk of all-cause mortality decreased by 21% for every additional five patients treated per provider per year (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.94). Patients treated with IMRT by higher-volume providers had decreased HNC-specific mortality (subdistribution HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.91) and decreased risk of aspiration pneumonia (subdistribution HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.99).ConclusionPatients receiving IMRT for HNC had improved outcomes when treated by higher-volume providers. These findings will better inform patients and providers when making decisions about treatment, and emphasize the critical importance of high-quality radiation therapy for optimal treatment of HNC.

PurposeAdjuvant radiation therapy, which has proven benefit against breast cancer, has historically been associated with an increased incidence of ischemic heart disease. Modern techniques have reduced this risk, but a detailed evaluation has not recently been conducted. The present study evaluated the effect of current radiation practices on ischemia-related cardiac events and procedures in a population-based study of older women with nonmetastatic breast cancer.Methods and materialsA total of 29,102 patients diagnosed from 2000 to 2009 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database. Medicare claims were used to identify the radiation therapy and cardiac outcomes. Competing risk models were used to assess the effect of radiation on these outcomes.ResultsPatients with left-sided breast cancer had a small increase in their risk of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after radiation therapy-the 10-year cumulative incidence for these patients was 5.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.9%-6.2%) and 4.5% (95% CI 4.0%-5.0%) for right-sided patients. This risk was limited to women with previous cardiac disease. For patients who underwent PCI, those with left-sided breast cancer had a significantly increased risk of cardiac mortality with a subdistribution hazard ratio of 2.02 (95% CI 1.23-3.34). No other outcome, including cardiac mortality for the entire cohort, showed a significant relationship with tumor laterality.ConclusionsFor women with a history of cardiac disease, those with left-sided breast cancer who underwent radiation therapy had increased rates of PCI and a survival decrement if treated with PCI. The results of the present study could help cardiologists and radiation oncologists better stratify patients who need more aggressive cardioprotective techniques.

Background and purposeIn cost-effective healthcare systems, the cost of services should parallel patient complexity or quality of care. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the cost of radiotherapy correlates with patient-related outcomes among a large cohort of breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant breast radiation.Materials and methods23,127 women with non-metastatic breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy after breast conservation surgery were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2000 to 2009. Medicare reimbursements were used as a proxy for cost of radiotherapy, and Medicare claims were examined to identify local toxicities, and breast cancer-related endpoints. The impact of cost on these outcomes was studied with multivariable Fine-Gray models to account for competing risks.ResultsThe median cost (and interquartile range) of a course of breast radiation was $8100 ($6700-9700). Increased radiation costs were not associated with the occurrence of treatment-related toxicities (all p-values>0.05), ipsilateral breast recurrence (p=0.55), or breast cancer-related mortality (p=0.55).ConclusionHigher costs for adjuvant radiation in breast cancer were not associated with a decreased risk of patient-related outcomes suggesting inefficiency in Medicare reimbursements. Future efforts should focus on prospective evaluation of alternative payment models for radiotherapy.

BackgroundMost gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are considered nonhereditary or sporadic. However, single-institution studies suggest that GIST patients develop additional malignancies at increased frequencies. It was hypothesized that greater insight could be gained into possible associations between GISTs and other malignancies with a national cancer database inquiry.MethodsPatients diagnosed with GISTs (2001-2011) in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database were included. Standardized prevalence ratios (SPRs) and standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were used to quantify cancer risks incurred by GIST patients before and after GIST diagnoses, respectively, in comparison with the general US population.ResultsThere were 6112 GIST patients, and 1047 (17.1%) had additional cancers. There were significant increases in overall cancer rates: 44% (SPR, 1.44) before the GIST diagnosis and 66% (SIR, 1.66) after the GIST diagnosis. Malignancies with significantly increased occurrence both before and after diagnoses included other sarcomas (SPR, 5.24; SIR, 4.02), neuroendocrine-carcinoid tumors (SPR, 3.56; SIR, 4.79), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (SPR, 1.69; SIR, 1.76), and colorectal adenocarcinoma (SPR, 1.51; SIR, 2.16). Esophageal adenocarcinoma (SPR, 12.0), bladder adenocarcinoma (SPR, 7.51), melanoma (SPR, 1.46), and prostate adenocarcinoma (SPR, 1.20) were significantly more common only before the GIST diagnosis. Ovarian carcinoma (SIR, 8.72), small intestine adenocarcinoma (SIR, 5.89), papillary thyroid cancer (SIR, 5.16), renal cell carcinoma (SIR, 4.46), hepatobiliary adenocarcinoma (SIR, 3.10), gastric adenocarcinoma (SIR, 2.70), pancreatic adenocarcinoma (SIR, 2.03), uterine adenocarcinoma (SIR, 1.96), non-small cell lung cancer (SIR, 1.74), and transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder (SIR, 1.65) were significantly more common only after the GIST diagnosis.ConclusionsThis is the first population-based study to characterize the associations and temporal relations between GISTs and other cancers by both site and histological type. These associations may carry important clinical implications for future cancer screening and treatment strategies.

PurposeRadiation therapy represents a major source of health care expenditure for patients with cancer. Understanding the sources of variability in the cost of radiation therapy is critical to evaluating the efficiency of the current reimbursement system and could shape future policy reform. This study defines the magnitude and sources of variation in the cost of radiation therapy for a large cohort of Medicare beneficiaries.Patients and methodsWe identified 55,288 patients within the SEER database diagnosed with breast, lung, or prostate cancer between 2004 and 2009. The cost of radiation therapy was estimated from Medicare reimbursements. Multivariable linear regression models were used to assess the influence of patient, tumor, and radiation therapy provider characteristics on variation in cost of radiation therapy.ResultsFor breast, lung, and prostate cancers, the median cost (interquartile range) of a course of radiation therapy was $8,600 ($7,300 to $10,300), $9,000 ($7,500 to $11,100), and $18,000 ($11,300 to $25,500), respectively. For all three cancer subtypes, patient- or tumor-related factors accounted for < 3% of the variation in cost. Factors unrelated to the patient, including practice type, geography, and individual radiation therapy provider, accounted for a substantial proportion of the variation in cost, ranging from 44% with breast, 43% with lung, and 61% with prostate cancer.ConclusionIn this study, factors unrelated to the individual patient accounted for the majority of variation in the cost of radiation therapy, suggesting potential inefficiency in health care expenditure. Future research should determine whether this variability translates into improved patient outcomes for further evaluation of current reimbursement practices.

BackgroundAspiration pneumonia represents an under-reported complication of chemoradiotherapy in patient with head and neck cancer. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and mortality of aspiration pneumonia in a large cohort of patients with head and neck cancer who received concurrent chemoradiotherapy.MethodsPatients who had head and neck cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2009 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database. Aspiration pneumonia was identified from Medicare billing claims. The cumulative incidence, risk factors, and survival after aspiration pneumonia were estimated and compared with a noncancer population.ResultsOf 3513 patients with head and neck cancer, 801 developed aspiration pneumonia at a median of 5 months after initiating treatment. The 1-year and 5-year cumulative incidence of aspiration pneumonia was 15.8% and 23.8%, respectively, for patients with head and neck cancer and 3.6% and 8.7%, respectively, for noncancer controls. Among the patients with cancer, multivariate analysis identified independent risk factors (P

To date, all population-based epidemiologic data on gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) in the United States predate the 2001 implementation of GIST-specific histology coding. As such, results from previous studies were limited because of inclusion of non-GIST abdominal or gastrointestinal sarcomas. We used a national cancer registry with modern day histologic codes to gain greater insight into the true epidemiology of GIST in the United States. We identified 6,142 patients diagnosed with GIST between 2001 and 2011 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Incidence, survival, demographic risk factors, and prognostic factors were analyzed. Annual age-adjusted incidence rose from 0.55/100,000 in 2001 to 0.78/100,000 in 2011 and increased with age, peaking among 70- to 79-year-olds (3.06/100,000). GIST was also more common in males than females [rate ratio (RR), 1.35], non-Hispanics than Hispanics (RR, 1.23), and blacks (RR, 2.07) or Asians/Pacific Islanders (RR, 1.50) than whites. The study period had 5-year overall and GIST-specific survival rates of 65% and 79%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival rates for those with localized, regional, and metastatic disease at diagnosis were 77%, 64%, and 41%, respectively. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that older age at diagnosis, male sex, black race, and advanced stage at diagnosis were independent risk factors for worse overall survival. Multivariate analysis also showed the four aforementioned characteristics, along with earlier year of diagnosis, to be independent risk factors for worse GIST-specific survival. As the first population-based, epidemiologic study of histologically confirmed disease, our findings provide a robust representation of GIST in the era of immunohistochemical diagnoses.

ContextRandomized data support shorter radiotherapy courses for management of cancer-related symptoms in the palliative setting.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the length of palliative radiotherapy before hospice enrollment among the elderly U.S. population, with a further focus on factors that influence the duration of radiation and the length of survival on hospice, including whether the duration of radiation was associated with length of survival on hospice.MethodsA total of 6982 patients with breast, prostate, lung, or colorectal cancer who received a course of radiotherapy within 30 days before hospice enrollment were identified within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database. The primary end points included the duration of palliative radiotherapy and the time from hospice enrollment through death (hospice duration). Multivariate linear regression and multivariate Cox models evaluated factors associated with the length of radiotherapy course and hospice duration.ResultsThe median length of palliative radiotherapy was 14 days, and the median hospice duration was 13 days. The course of palliative radiotherapy was longer than hospice duration in 48% of the patients. Breast and lung cancer were associated with longer courses of radiotherapy and shorter stays on hospice. Patients treated in freestanding radiation centers had longer courses of radiotherapy. For these groups, a longer radiotherapy course was not associated with longer hospice duration.ConclusionThis study found relatively long courses of radiotherapy before short lengths of survival on hospice. Future research is needed to identify barriers to shorter radiotherapy courses.

Background Opioid tapering in the general population is linked to increases in hospitalizations or emergency department visits related to psychiatric or drug-related diagnoses. Cancer survivors represent a unique population with different opioid indications, prescription patterns, and more frequent follow-up care. This study sought to describe patterns of opioid tapering among older cancer survivors and to test the hypothesis of whether older cancer survivors face increased risks of adverse events with opioid tapering. Methods Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Medicare–linked database, we identified 15 002 Medicare-beneficiary cancer survivors diagnosed between 2010 and 2017 prescribed opioids consistently for at least 6 months after their cancer diagnosis. Tapering was defined as a binary time-varying event occurring with any monthly oral morphine equivalent reduction of 15% or more from the previous month. Primary diagnostic billing codes associated with emergency room or hospital admissions were used for the composite endpoint of psychiatric- or drug-related event(s). Results There were 3.86 events per 100 patient-months, with 97.8% events being mental health emergencies, 1.91% events being overdose emergencies, and 0.25% involving both. Using a generalized estimating equation for repeated measure time-based analysis, opioid tapering was not statistically associated with acute events in the 3-month posttaper period (odds ratio [OR] = 1.02; P  = .62) or at any point in the future (OR = 0.96; P  = .46). Conclusions Opioid tapering in older cancer survivors does not appear to be linked to a higher risk of acute psychiatric- or drug-related events, in contrast to prior research in the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of the Light Adjustable Lens (LAL; RxSight) in comparison to a monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) for individuals undergoing cataract surgery in both eyes. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a Markov model that simulated the patient outcomes and costs associated with undergoing cataract surgery with the LAL or monofocal IOL. Cost-effectiveness was determined using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), a measure that quantifies the incremental cost in dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Treatments with the ICER below the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of $50,000/QALY were considered cost-effective. The model was also evaluated for the impact of uncertainties in parameters using one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the LAL is cost-effective compared to monofocal IOLs in patients undergoing cataract surgery, with ICERs of $9,792/QALY (health care perspective) and $10,072/QALY (societal perspective) both significantly below the WTP. The model was most sensitive to patient age, market cost of the LAL, and proportion of patients with residual astigmatism following cataract surgery. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that cataract surgeries in patients starting at age 65 years were cost-effective in 94% of the simulations at a WTP of $50,000/QALY. Conclusions: From both health care and societal perspectives, the study shows cataract surgeries performed with the LAL are cost-effective when compared to those performed with a monofocal IOL. More studies are needed to compare the LAL to other premium lenses that also provide patients with excellent visual outcomes at a higher cost. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(11):777–782.] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]