Cost–effectiveness analysis of treatments involving radioembolization in intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma
Abstract
Aim: We evaluated two treatment sequences, transarterial radioembolization followed by transarterial chemoembolization and possibly sorafenib (=TTS) versus transarterial radioembolization followed by sorafenib alone (=TS), to identify the most cost-effective pathway to treat intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma from the Italian healthcare system perspective. Materials & methods: A Markov model was developed to project costs and health outcomes for TTS and TS over a lifetime horizon. Data available at three hospitals in Italy were collected. Healthcare resource utilization was derived from standard clinical protocols. Costs were obtained from official regional tariffs. Results & Conclusion: Taking into consideration 16 patients for TTS and 22 patients for TS pathways, the TTS sequence provided a dominant strategy in comparison to TS. Further evidence is desirable to confirm these results.
Supplementary Material
References
Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest
1.
Kim DY, Han KH. Epidemiology and surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Cancer 1(1), 2–14 (2012).
• Provides background on epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma.
2.
Baffy G. Decoding multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma: an opportune pursuit. HepatoBiliary Surg. Nutr. 4(3), 206–210 (2015).
3.
Sacco R, Mismas V, Marceglia S et al. Transarterial radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: an update and perspectives. World J. Gastroenterol. 21(21), 6518–6525 (2015).
4.
Finn RS. Treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 11(8), 545–547 (2015).
•• Provides background on possible treatments for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, including the emerging role of transarterial radioembolization.
5.
Tsochatzis EA, Fatourou E, O'Beirne J, Meyer T, Burroughs AK. Transarterial chemoembolization and bland embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. World J. Gastroenterol. 20(12), 3069–3077 (2014).
6.
Sangro B, Salem R, Kennedy A, Coldwell D, Wasan H. Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a review of the evidence and treatment recommendations. Am. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 422–431 (2011).
7.
Rognoni C, Ciani O, Sommariva S et al. Trans-arterial radioembolization in intermediate-advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analyses. Oncotarget 7(44), 72343–72355 (2016).
8.
Sangro B, Carpanese L, Cianni R et al. European Network on Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 Resin Microspheres (ENRY). Survival after yttrium-90 resin microsphere radioembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma across Barcelona clinic liver cancer stages: a European evaluation. Hepatology 54, 868–878 (2011).
9.
Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Kulik L et al. Radioembolization results in longer time-to-progression and reduced toxicity compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 140, 497–507 (2011).
10.
Mazzaferro V, Sposito C, Bhoori S et al. Yttrium-90 radioembolization for intermediate-advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a Phase 2 study. Hepatology 57(5), 1826–1837 (2013).
11.
Geschwind JF, Salem R, Carr BI et al. Yttrium-90 microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 127, S194–S205 (2004).
12.
EASL–EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. www.easl.eu.
13.
AASLD. www.aasld.org.
14.
European Society for Medical Oncology. Hepatocellular carcinoma: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up (2010). www.esmo.org.
15.
ESDO. www.esdo.eu.
16.
Rostambeigi N, Dekarske AS, Austin EE, Golzarian J, Cressman EN. Cost–effectiveness of radioembolization compared with conventional transarterial chemoembolization for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 25(7), 1075–1084 (2014).
17.
Porter CA, Friese JL, Fleming CJ, Andrews JC. Cost analysis of yttrium-90 radioembolization vs hepatic artery chemoembolization (HACE) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Presented at: Radiological Society of North America 2009 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, USA, 29 November–4 December 2009.
18.
Beheshti MV, Beheshti MJ. Cost–effectiveness of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) vs. systemic therapy in the treatment of patients with intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 22(3), S106 (2011).
19.
Vouche M, Kulik L, Atassi R et al. Radiological-pathological analysis of WHO, RECIST, EASL, mRECIST and DWI: imaging analysis from a prospective randomized trial of Y90 ± sorafenib. Hepatology 58(5), 1655–1666 (2013).
20.
Kudo M, Imanaka K, Chida N et al. Phase III study of sorafenib after transarterial chemoembolisation in Japanese and Korean patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur. J. Cancer 47, 2117–2127 (2011).
21.
Sansonno D, Lauletta G, Russi S, Conteduca V, Sansonno L, Dammacco F. Transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib: a sequential therapeutic scheme for HCV-related intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized clinical trial. Oncologist 17, 359–366 (2012).
22.
Ricke J, Bulla K, Kolligs F et al. Safety and toxicity of radioembolization plus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: analysis of the European multicenter trial SORAMIC. Liver Int. 35(2), 620–626 (2015).
23.
Zhao RC, Zhou J, Wei YG et al. Cost–effectiveness analysis of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization with or without sorafenib for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatobiliary Pancreat. Dis. Int. 16(5), 493–498 (2017).
24.
Rognoni C, Ciani O, Sommariva S, Tarricone R. Real world data for the evaluation of trans-arterial radioembolization versus sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: a cost–effectiveness analysis. Value Health 20(3), 336–344 (2017).
•• Provides background for the primary cost–effectiveness analysis, which was the starting point for the present paper.
25.
Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1), 15 (1983).
26.
27.
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal (2013). https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/chapter/foreword.
28.
Associazione Italiana di Economica Sanitaria (AIES). Proposta di linee guida per la valutazione economica degli interventi sanitari. PharmacoEconomics Italian Res. Artic. 11(2), 83–93 (2009).
29.
Lucioni C, Ravasio R. How to evaluate the results of a pharmacoeconomic study? PharmacoEconomics Italian Res. Artic. 6(3), 121–130 (2004).
30.
Messori A, Santarlasci B, Trippoli S, Vaiani M. Clinical benefit and economic value: methodology and an economic application. PharmacoEconomics Italian Res. Artic. 5(2), 53–67 (2003).
31.
Tarricone R, Torbica A, Ferrè F, Drummond M. Generating appropriate clinical data for value assessment of medical devices: what role does regulation play? Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 14(5), 707–718 (2014).
32.
Tarricone R, Torbica A, Drummond M. Challenges in the assessment of medical devices: the MedtecHTA project. Health Econ. 26(Suppl.), 5–12 (2017).
33.
Tarricone R, Boscolo PR, Armeni P. What type of clinical evidence is needed to assess health technologies? Euro. Respir. Rev. 25, 259–265 (2016).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2018 Future Medicine Ltd.
History
Received: 1 July 2017
Accepted: 26 October 2017
Published online: 12 December 2017
Keywords:
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Article usage data only available from February 2023. Historical article usage data, showing the number of article downloads, is available upon request.
Citations
How to Cite
Cost–effectiveness analysis of treatments involving radioembolization in intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. (2017) Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. DOI: 10.2217/cer-2017-0050
Export citation
Select the citation format you wish to export for this article or chapter.
Citing Literature
- Alexandra Morris, Stefan Brancel, Scott Schwartz, Should Transarterial Radioembolization Be the First-Line Therapy Compared to Transarterial Chemoembolization for Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma?, Controversies in Hepatocellular Carcinoma, 10.1007/978-3-031-90225-3_20, (143-149), (2025).
- Go Shirota, So Sato, Hideo Yasunaga, Shotaro Aso, Masaaki Akahane, Daisuke Itoh, Osamu Abe, Transarterial radioembolization vs transarterial chemoembolization with drug-eluting beads for treating hepatocellular carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis in Japanese healthcare system, Japanese Journal of Radiology, 10.1007/s11604-024-01640-1, 42, 12, (1501-1515), (2024).
- Jen-Yu Amy Chang, James B. Chilcott, Nicholas R. Latimer, Challenges and Opportunities in Interdisciplinary Research and Real-World Data for Treatment Sequences in Health Technology Assessments, PharmacoEconomics, 10.1007/s40273-024-01363-1, 42, 5, (487-506), (2024).
- J. C. Alonso, I. Casans, F. M. González, D. Fuster, A. Rodríguez, N. Sánchez, I. Oyagüez, R. Burgos, A. O. Williams, N. Espinoza, Economic evaluations of radioembolization with Itrium-90 microspheres in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review, BMC Gastroenterology, 10.1186/s12876-022-02396-6, 22, 1, (2022).
- Min Huang, Scott Ramsey, Weiguang Xue, Jipan Xie, James Pellissier, Andrew Briggs, Conceptual Framework and Methodological Challenges for Modeling Effectiveness in Oncology Treatment Sequence Models, PharmacoEconomics, 10.1007/s40273-021-01113-7, 40, 3, (257-268), (2021).
- Sydney C. Yuen, Adaeze Q. Amaefule, Hannah H. Kim, Breanna-Verissa Owoo, Emily F. Gorman, T. Joseph Mattingly, A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment, PharmacoEconomics - Open, 10.1007/s41669-021-00298-z, 6, 1, (9-19), (2021).
- Matthew Walton, Ros Wade, Lindsay Claxton, Sahar Sharif-Hurst, Melissa Harden, Jai Patel, Ian Rowe, Robert Hodgson, Alison Eastwood, Selective internal radiation therapies for unresectable early-, intermediate- or advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review, network meta-analysis and economic evaluation, Health Technology Assessment, 10.3310/hta24480, 24, 48, (1-264), (2020).
- Richard F. Pollock, Fabien Colaone, Laura Guardiola, Suki Shergill, Victoria K. Brennan, A cost analysis of SIR-Spheres yttrium-90 resin microspheres versus tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in France, Italy, Spain and the UK, Journal of Medical Economics, 10.1080/13696998.2020.1731213, 23, 6, (593-602), (2020).