Search

Objectives: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a serious challenge for the health system. In 2022 CRC represented 8% of cancer diagnoses in the United States. 30% of patients already show metastases at the initial tumor staging. The majority of these metastases are sited in the liver. According to their extension and the status of the tumor colorectal liver metastases can be treated in several ways, with hepatic resection being the gold-standard. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT), positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be used for evaluation of resectability of these liver metastases. The aim of this study is to assess the most economic imaging modality for detecting liver metastases eligible for hepatic resection by analyzing their cost-effectiveness. Materials and methods: In our study, a Markov state transition model was built to calculate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and overall costs for each diagnostic strategy in accord with the stated input values obtained from scientific research. Further, probabilistic sensitivity analyses by means of Monte Carlo simulations were performed to consider possible model uncertainties. For evaluation of the cost-effectiveness on an economic threshold, the Willingnessto- pay (WTP) was set at $ 100,000. The applied values and the calculated results are based on the U.S. healthcare system. Results: CE-CT led to overall costs of $ 42,874.02 and 8.47 QALYs, whereas MRI led to $ 40,863.65 and 8.50 QALYs. PET/CT resulted in overall costs of $ 43,216.74 and 8.48 QALYs. Therefore, MRI was determined to be the dominant strategy in the model. According to the performed sensitivity analyses, MRI remained cost-effective over a wide range of WTPs. Conclusion: In conclusion, according to our analysis, MRI is the dominant strategy for detecting hepatic metastases eligible for hepatic resection in colorectal cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI) was introduced to reduce both examination and image reading times and to improve cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening. The aim of this model-based economic study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of full protocol breast MRI (FB-MRI) vs. AB-MRI in screening women with dense breast tissue for breast cancer. Methods: Decision analysis and a Markov model were designed to model the cumulative costs and effects of biennial screening in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from a US healthcare system perspective. Model input parameters for a cohort of women with dense breast tissue were adopted from recent literature. The impact of varying AB-MRI costs per examination as well as specificity on the resulting cost-effectiveness was modeled within deterministic sensitivity analyses. Results: At an assumed cost per examination of $ 263 for AB-MRI (84% of the cost of a FB-MRI examination), the discounted cumulative costs of both MR-based strategies accounted comparably. Reducing the costs of AB-MRI below $ 259 (82% of the cost of a FB-MRI examination, respectively), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of FB-MRI exceeded the willingness to pay threshold and the AB-MRI-strategy should be considered preferable in terms of cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: Our preliminary findings indicate that AB-MRI may be considered cost-effective compared to FB-MRI for screening women with dense breast tissue for breast cancer, as long as the costs per examination do not exceed 82% of the cost of a FB-MRI examination. Key Points: • Cost-effectiveness of abbreviated breast MRI is affected by reductions in specificity and resulting false positive findings and increased recall rates. • Abbreviated breast MRI may be cost-effective up to a cost per examination of 82% of the cost of a full protocol examination. • Abbreviated breast MRI could be an economically preferable alternative to full protocol breast MRI in screening women with dense breast tissue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose: Treatment of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is based on clinical exam, biopsy, and a precise imaging-based TNM-evaluation. A high sensitivity and specificity for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and F-18 FDG PET/CT are reported for N-staging. Nevertheless, staging of oral squamous cell carcinoma is most often based on computed tomography (CT) scans. This study aims to evaluate cost-effectiveness of MRI and PET/CT compared to standard of care imaging in initial staging of OSCC within the US Healthcare System. Methods: A decision model was constructed using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and overall costs of different imaging strategies including a CT of the head, neck, and the thorax, MRI of the neck with CT of the thorax, and whole body F-18 FDG PET/CT using Markov transition simulations for different disease states. Input parameters were derived from literature and willingness to pay (WTP) was set to US $100,000/QALY. Deterministic sensitivity analysis of diagnostic parameters and costs was performed. Monte Carlo modeling was used for probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: In the base-case scenario, total costs were at US $239,628 for CT, US $240,001 for MRI, and US $239,131 for F-18 FDG PET/CT whereas the model yielded an effectiveness of 5.29 QALYs for CT, 5.30 QALYs for MRI, and 5.32 QALYs for F-18 FDG PET/CT respectively. F-18 FDG PET/CT was the most cost-effective strategy over MRI as well as CT, and MRI was the cost-effective strategy over CT. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed high robustness of the model with incremental cost effectiveness ratio remaining below US $100,000/QALY for a wide range of variability of input parameters. Conclusion: F-18 FDG PET/CT is the most cost-effective strategy in the initial N-staging of OSCC when compared to MRI and CT. Despite less routine use, both whole body PET/CT and MRI are cost-effective modalities in the N-staging of OSCC. Based on these findings, the implementation of PET/CT for initial staging could be suggested to help reduce costs while increasing effectiveness in OSCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: There are several benign and malignant types of solid renal masses. For diagnostic and characterization of these masses, a few imaging methods such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) or (contrast-enhanced) ultrasound (CEUS) are established in the clinical routine. The aim of our study was to assess the most economical approach for detecting and characterizing these masses. As a result, contrast-enhanced ultrasound turned out to be a cost-effective diagnostic method. Therefore, if available, this method should be considered in the routine. Alternatively, MRI also offers excellent diagnostic accuracy, but it is associated with higher costs. This result may lead to a change in the diagnostic workup of solid renal masses in clinical routine, as contrast-enhanced ultrasound should be considered as an appropriate method for the first analysis compared to CT and MRI. Background: For patients with solid renal masses, a precise differentiation between malignant and benign tumors is crucial for forward treatment management. Even though MRI and CT are often deemed as the gold standard in the diagnosis of solid renal masses, CEUS may also offer very high sensitivity in detection. The aim of this study therefore was to evaluate the effectiveness of CEUS from an economical point of view. Methods: A decision-making model based on a Markov model assessed expenses and utilities (in QALYs) associated with CEUS, MRI and CT. The utilized parameters were acquired from published research. Further, a Monte Carlo simulation-based deterministic sensitivity analysis of utilized variables with 30,000 repetitions was executed. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) is at USD 100,000/QALY. Results: In the baseline, CT caused overall expenses of USD 10,285.58 and an efficacy of 11.95 QALYs, whereas MRI caused overall expenses of USD 7407.70 and an efficacy of 12.25. Further, CEUS caused overall expenses of USD 5539.78, with an efficacy of 12.44. Consequently, CT and MRI were dominated by CEUS, and CEUS remained cost-effective in the sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: CEUS should be considered as a cost-effective imaging strategy for the initial diagnostic workup and assessment of solid renal masses compared to CT and MRI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MR-mammography (MRM) vs. x-ray based mammography (XM) in two-yearly screening women of intermediate risk for breast cancer in the light of recent literature. Methods: Decision analysis and Markov modelling were used to compare cumulative costs (in US-$) and outcomes (in QALYs) of MRM vs. XM over the model runtime of 20 years. The perspective of the U.S. healthcare system was selected. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated and related to a willingness to pay-threshold of $ 100,000 per QALY in order to evaluate the cost-effectiveness. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the impact of variations of the input parameters. In particular, variations of the rate of false positive findings beyond the first screening round and their impact on cost-effectiveness were assessed. Results: Breast cancer screening with MRM resulted in increased costs and superior effectiveness. Cumulative average costs of $ 6,081 per woman and cumulative effects of 15.12 QALYs were determined for MRM, whereas screening with XM resulted in costs of $ 5,810 and 15.10 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $ 13,493 per QALY gained. When the specificity of MRM in the second and subsequent screening rounds was varied from 92% to 99%, the ICER resulted in a range from $ 38,849 to $ 5,062 per QALY. Conclusions: Based on most recent data on the diagnostic performance beyond the first screening round, MRM may remain the economically preferable alternative in screening women of intermediate risk for breast cancer due to their dense breast tissue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In certain malignancies, patients with oligometastatic disease benefit from radical ablative or surgical treatment. The SABR-COMET trial demonstrated a survival benefit for oligometastatic patients randomized to local stereotactic ablative radiation (SABR) compared to patients receiving standard care (SC) alone. Our aim was to determine the cost-effectiveness of SABR. Materials and Methods: A decision model based on partitioned survival simulations estimated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) associated with both strategies in a United States setting from a health care perspective. Analyses were performed over the trial duration of six years as well as a long-term horizon of 16 years. Model input parameters were based on the SABR-COMET trial data as well as best available and most recent data provided in the published literature. An annual discount of 3% for costs was implemented in the analysis. All costs were adjusted to 2019 US Dollars according to the United States Consumer Price Index. SABR costs were reported with an average of $11,700 per treatment. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Incremental costs, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set to $100,000/QALY. Results: Based on increased overall and progression-free survival, the SABR group showed 0.78 incremental QALYs over the trial duration and 1.34 incremental QALYs over the long-term analysis. Treatment with SABR led to a marginal increase in costs compared to SC alone (SABR: $304,656; SC: $303,523 for 6 years; ICER $1,446/QALY and SABR: $402,888; SC: $350,708 for long-term analysis; ICER $38,874/QALY). Therapy with SABR remained cost-effective until treatment costs of $88,969 over the trial duration (i.e. 7.6 times the average cost). Sensitivity analysis identified a strong model impact for ongoing annual costs of oligo- and polymetastatic disease states. Conclusion: Our analysis suggests that local treatment with SABR adds QALYs for patients with certain oligometastatic cancers and represents an intermediate- and long-term cost-effective treatment strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Colorectal cancer is among the most prevalent cancers worldwide, with every second patient developing liver metastasis during their illness. For treatment of oligometastatic patients, there are several alternatives such as surgery, microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Our aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness for each strategy, accounting for short- and long-term costs and efficacy. The analysis demonstrated that MWA and surgery offer a comparable efficacy. MWA was the most cost-effective strategy in intermediate resource settings, and can be considered a cost-effective alternative to surgery in high resource settings. Background: Colorectal cancer is among the most prevalent cancer entities worldwide, with every second patient developing liver metastases during their illness. For local treatment of liver metastases, a surgical approach as well as ablative treatment options, such as microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), are available. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RFA, MWA and surgery in the treatment of liver metastases of oligometastatic colorectal cancer (omCRC) that are amenable for all investigated treatment modalities. Methods: A decision analysis based on a Markov model assessed lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) related to the treatment strategies RFA, MWA and surgical resection. Input parameters were based on the best available and most recent evidence. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed with Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate model robustness. The percentage of cost-effective iterations was determined for different willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. Results: The base-case analysis showed that surgery led to higher long-term costs compared to RFA and MWA (USD 41,848 vs. USD 36,937 vs. USD 35,234), while providing better long-term outcomes than RFA, yet slightly lower than MWA (6.80 vs. 6.30 vs. 6.95 QALYs for surgery, RFA and MWA, respectively). In PSA, MWA was the most cost-effective strategy for all WTP thresholds below USD 80,000 per QALY. Conclusions: In omCRC patients with liver metastases, MWA and surgery are estimated to provide comparable efficacy. MWA was identified as the most cost-effective strategy in intermediate resource settings and should be considered as an alternative to surgery in high resource settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The incidence of IPMN is increasing, mainly attributed to the expanded application of radiological cross-sectional imaging and improvements in image quality. IPMN are the cause of approximately 10% of all pancreatectomies in the USA. A significant number of surgically treated IPMNs do not show high-grade dysplasia or invasive cancer, raising the question of overtreatment, and the need for better diagnostic accuracy. 18F-FDG-PET/CT demonstrated promising diagnostic performance in the detection of malignant transformation of IPMN in comparison to CT and MRI. In this study, the authors analyze whether a supplemental 18F-FDG-PET/CT to the current diagnostic pathway of IPMN could be cost-effective. Results suggest that implementation of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in a preoperative setting could be beneficial from a health care system perspective. It also encourages the research community to investigate if 18F-FDG-PET/CT could be a useful addition in other diagnostic settings within IPMN management. Accurate detection of malignant transformation and risk-stratification of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) has remained a diagnostic challenge. Preliminary findings have indicated a promising role of positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG-PET/CT) in detecting malignant IPMN. Therefore, the aim of this model-based economic evaluation was to analyze whether supplemental FDG-PET/CT could be cost-effective in patients with IPMN. Decision analysis and Markov modeling were applied to simulate patients' health states across a time frame of 15 years. CT/MRI based imaging was compared to a strategy with supplemental 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Cumulative costs in US-$ and outcomes in quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were computed based on input parameters extracted from recent literature. The stability of the model was evaluated by deterministic sensitivity analyses. In the base-case scenario, the CT/MRI-strategy resulted in cumulative discounted costs of USD $106,424 and 8.37 QALYs, while the strategy with supplemental FDG-PET/CT resulted in costs of USD $104,842 and a cumulative effectiveness of 8.48 QALYs and hence was cost-saving. A minimum specificity of FDG-PET/CT of 71.5% was required for the model to yield superior net monetary benefits compared to CT/MRI. This model-based economic evaluation indicates that supplemental 18F-FDG-PET/CT could have a favorable economic value in the management of IPMN and could be cost-saving in the chosen setting. Prospective studies with standardized protocols for FDG-PET/CT could help to better determine the value of FDG-PET/CT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Women with dense breasts have an increased risk of breast cancer and a smaller likelihood of detection in conventional mammographic screening. It is an ongoing challenge of breast imaging techniques to increase sensitivity in dense breasts. Tomosynthesis, as well as abbreviated breast MR, intends to close the gap between optimal cancer detection rate and cost-effectiveness. The aim of this economic evaluation was to analyse the cost-effectiveness of these two imaging techniques in screening women of intermediate risk of breast cancer due to dense breasts. The model-based analysis revealed that abbreviated breast MRI can be considered cost-effective, being below the willingness to pay-threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Background: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI) offer superior diagnostic performance compared to conventional mammography in screening women with intermediate risk of breast cancer due to dense breast tissue. The aim of this model-based economic evaluation was to analyze whether AB-MRI is cost-effective in this cohort compared to DBT. Methods: Decision analysis and Markov simulations were used to model the cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a time horizon of 30 years. Model input parameters were adopted from recent literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were applied to test the stability of the model. Results: In the base-case scenario, the costs of an AB-MRI examination were defined to equal the costs of a full protocol acquisition. Two-yearly screening of women with dense breasts resulted in cumulative discounted costs of $8798 and $9505 for DBT and AB-MRI, and cumulative discounted effects of 19.23 and 19.27 QALYs, respectively, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $20,807 per QALY gained in the base-case scenario. By reducing the cost of an AB-MRI examination below a threshold of $241 in sensitivity analyses, AB-MRI would become cost-saving compared to DBT. Conclusion: In comparison to DBT, AB-MRI can be considered cost-effective up to a price per examination of $593 in screening patients at intermediate risk of breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Fusion imaging depicts an innovative technique by which previously performed computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging can be integrated and reconstructed with advanced contrast-enhanced ultrasound using modern ultrasound devices in a real-time manner. Fusion imaging allows for complementing strengths and reducing restrictions of the combined imaging modalities. The visualization of parenchymal and tumoral microperfusion by contrast-enhanced ultrasound can be dynamically fused and assessed with images from previous cross-sectional studies and may help to decipher underlying entities of indeterminate lesions or validate suspicious morphology. The findings from our study demonstrate the benefits of fusion imaging for evaluating focal hepatic and renal lesions. The excellent safety profile, accessibility, repeatability and cost-effectiveness are advantages of fusion imaging which make it a powerful diagnostic tool for the modern radiologist. Fusion imaging depicts an innovative technique that facilitates combining assets and reducing restrictions of advanced ultrasound and cross-sectional imaging. The purpose of the present retrospective study was to evaluate the role of fusion imaging for assessing hepatic and renal lesions. Between 02/2011–08/2020, 92 patients in total were included in the study, of which 32 patients had hepatic lesions, 60 patients had renal lesions. Fusion imaging was technically successful in all patients. No adverse side effects upon intravenous (i.v.) application of SonoVue® (Bracco, Milan, Italy) were registered. Fusion imaging could clarify all 11 (100%) initially as indeterminate described hepatic lesions by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI). Moreover, 5/14 (36%) initially suspicious hepatic lesions could be validated by fusion imaging, whereas in 8/14 (57%), malignant morphology was disproved. Moreover, fusion imaging allowed for the clarification of 29/30 (97%) renal lesions initially characterized as suspicious by CT/MRI, of which 19/30 (63%) underwent renal surgery, histopathology revealed malignancy in 16/19 (84%), and benignity in 3/19 (16%). Indeterminate findings could be elucidated by fusion imaging in 20/20 (100%) renal lesions. Its accessibility and repeatability, even during pregnancy and in childhood, its cost-effectiveness, and its excellent safety profile, make fusion imaging a promising instrument for the thorough evaluation of hepatic and renal lesions in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: After a percutaneous ablation of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), follow-up investigations to evaluate potential tumor recurrence are necessary. The aim of this study was to analyze whether a combined 18F-Fluordesoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) scan is cost-effective compared to a contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) scan for detecting local tumor progression. Materials and Methods: A decision model based on Markov simulations that estimated lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was developed. Model input parameters were obtained from the recent literature. Deterministic sensitivity analysis of diagnostic parameters based on a Monte-Carlo simulation with 30,000 iterations was performed. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) was set to $100,000/QALY. Results: In the base-case scenario, CE-CT resulted in total costs of $28,625.08 and an efficacy of 0.755 QALYs, whereas 18F-FDG PET/CT resulted in total costs of $29,239.97 with an efficacy of 0.767. Therefore, the corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 18F-FDG PET/CT was $50,338.96 per QALY indicating cost-effectiveness based on the WTP threshold set above. The results were stable in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Based on our model, 18F-FDG PET/CT can be considered as a cost-effective imaging alternative for follow-up investigations after percutaneous ablation of colorectal liver metastases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colorectal cancers (CRC) are among the world's most prevailing cancer entities. In a third of all cases, the patients have already developed distant metastases - mainly in the liver - at the time of detection. Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) can be treated by surgical resection or, as is possible in most cases, by percutaneous ablation. For selecting the liver metastases eligible for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or microwave ablation (MWA), the common imaging modalities are magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT). This study aims to evaluate those imaging modalities for selecting liver lesions eligible for ablation according to their long-term cost-effectiveness. A Markov model was applied, calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and accumulative costs for every diagnostic strategy, according to predefined input parameters obtained from published research. Further, sensitivity analyses were executed to prove the certainty of the calculations by running Monte-Carlo simulations with 30,000 reiterations. The Willingness-to-pay (WTP) is at $ 100,000. All calculations are based on the U.S. healthcare system. CE-CT caused cumulative costs of $ 31,940.98 and 8,99 QALYs, whereas MRI caused $ 32,070.83 and 9,01 QALYs. PET/CT caused cumulative costs of $ 33,013.21 and 8,99 QALYs. In conclusion, according to our analysis, MRI is the most cost-effective strategy for detecting liver metastases eligible for ablation and therefore should be seen as the gold standard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Aim of this study was to analyze the comparative cost-effectiveness of MR-mammography vs conventional imaging in a screening setting for women with high risk of breast cancer, with particular focus on the impact of specificity of MRM.Method: Decision analytic modelling and Markov Modelling were applied to evaluate cumulative costs of each screening modality and their subsequent treatments as well as cumulative outcomes in quality adjusted life years (QALYs). For the selected time horizon of 30 years, false positive and false negative results were included. Model input parameters for women with high risk of breast cancer were estimated based on published data from a US healthcare system perspective. Major influence factors were identified and evaluated in a deterministic sensitivity analysis. Based on current recommendations for economic evaluations, a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the model stability.Results: In a base-case analysis, screening with XM vs. MRM and treatment resulted in overall costs of $36,201.57 vs. $39,050.97 and a cumulative effectiveness of 19.53 QALYs vs. 19.59 QALYs. This led to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $ 45,373.94 per QALY for MRM. US and XM + US resulted in ICER values higher than the willingness to pay (WTP). In the sensitivity analyses, MRM remained a cost-effective strategy for screening high-risk patients as long as the specificity of MRM did not drop below 86.7 %.Conclusion: In high-risk breast cancer patients, MRM can be regarded as a cost-effective alternative to XM in a yearly screening setting. Specificity may be an important cost driver in settings with yearly screening intervals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]