Surgical vs Endoscopic Management of T1 Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Modeling Decision Analysis

Background & Aims Although treatment of T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is shifting from esophagectomy to endoscopic therapy, T1b EACs are considered too high risk to be treated endoscopically. We investigated the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of esophagectomy vs endoscopic therapy for T1a and T1b EACs, and the effects of age and comorbidities, using a decision analytic Markov model. Methods We developed a model to simulate a hypothetical cohort of men 75 years old with Charlson comorbidity index scores of 0 and either T1aN0M0 or T1bN0M0 EAC, as a base case. We used the model to compare the effects of esophagectomy vs serial endoscopic therapy. We performed sensitivity analyses based on age at diagnosis of 60–85 years, comorbidity indices of 0–2, and utilities. Post-procedure cancer-specific mortality was derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare database. Results In the T1a base case, esophagectomy yielded more unadjusted life years than endoscopic therapy (6.97 vs 6.81), but fewer quality-adjusted life years (QALYs, 4.95 for esophagectomy vs 5.22 for endoscopic therapy). In the T1b base case, esophagectomy yielded more unadjusted life years than endoscopic therapy (5.73 vs 5.01) and QALYs (4.07 vs 3.85 for endoscopic therapy), but was not cost effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $156,981). Sensitivity analyses showed endoscopic therapy optimized QALYs for patients more than 80 years old with a comorbidity index of 1 or 2, or if the ratio of post-esophagectomy to post-endoscopic therapy utilities was below 0.875. Conclusion In a Markov model, we showed that endoscopic therapy of T1a EAC yields more QALYs and is more cost effective than esophagectomy for patients of all ages and comorbidity indices tested. In contrast, selection of therapy for T1b EAC depends on age and comorbidities, due to surgical mortality and the competing risk of non-cancer death.