FCCC LOGO Faculty Publications
Konski A , Sherman E , Krahn M , Bremner K , Beck JR , Watkins-Bruner D , Pilepich M
Economic analysis of a phase III clinical trial evaluating the addition of total androgen suppression to radiation versus radiation alone for locally advanced prostate cancer (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocol 86-10)
International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2005 Nov 1;63(3) :788-794
Back to previous list
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding hormone therapy to radiation for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer, using a Monte Carlo simulation of a Markov Model. Methods and Materials: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) protocol 86-10 randomized patients to receive radiation therapy (RT) alone or RT plus total androgen suppression (RTHormones) 2 months before and during RT for the treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer. A Markov model was designed with Data Pro (TreeAge Software, Williamstown, MA). The analysis took a payer's perspective. Transition probabilities from one state of health (i.e., with no disease progression or with hormone-responsive metastatic disease) to another were calculated from published rates pertaining to RTOG 86-10. Patients remained in one state of health for 1 year. Utility values for each health state and treatment were obtained from the literature. Distributions were sampled at random from the treatment utilities according to a second-order Monte Carlo simulation technique. Results: The mean expected cost for the RT-only treatments was $29,240 (range, $29,138-$29,403). The mean effectiveness for the RT-only treatment was 5.48 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (range, 5.47-5.50). The mean expected cost for RTHormones was $31,286 (range, $31,058-$31,555). The mean effectiveness was 6.43 QALYs (range, 6.42-6.44). Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis showed RTHormones to be within the range of cost-effectiveness at $2,153/QALY. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve analysis resulted in a > 80% probability that RTHormones is cost-effective. Conclusions: Our analysis shows that adding hormonal treatment to RT improves health outcomes at a cost that is within the acceptable cost-effectiveness range. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc.
Notes
English Article