Economic analyses in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A review of the literature from a clinical perspective

International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

Volumn 89, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 989-996

  De Souza, Jonas A ^a   Santana, Iuri A ^b   De Castro Jr , Gilberto ^b   De Lima Lopes Jr , Gilberto ^c   Tina Shih, Ya Chen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo   (Brazil)

^c Johns Hopkins Singapore   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMOTHERAPY; COST ACCOUNTING; COST EFFECTIVENESS; RADIOTHERAPY;

CLINICAL PRACTICES; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; LITERATURE SEARCH; MODEL ASSUMPTIONS; ORGAN PRESERVATION; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA OF THE HEAD AND NECKS; TREATMENT MODALITY;

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RECURRENCE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; HEAD AND NECK SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDLINE; METASTASIS; MULTIMODALITY CANCER THERAPY; ORGAN PRESERVATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BRACHYTHERAPY; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; HEAD AND NECK NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; NECK DISSECTION; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; ORGAN SPARING TREATMENTS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RADIOTHERAPY; RADIOTHERAPY, INTENSITY-MODULATED; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, OPERATIVE;

EID: 84904099775     PISSN: 03603016     EISSN: 1879355X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.03.040     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. A. Jemal, F. Bray, and M.M. Center et al. Global cancer statistics CA Cancer J Clin 61 2011 69 90
2. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Head and neck cancers, version 2.2013. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/pdf/head-and-neck.pdf. Accessed May 25, 2013.
3. D.J. Haraf, F.R. Rosen, and K. Stenson et al. Induction chemotherapy followed by concomitant TFHX chemoradiotherapy with reduced dose radiation in advanced head and neck cancer Clin Cancer Res 9 2003 5936 5943
4. J.B. Vermorken, E. Remenar, and C. van Herpen et al. Cisplatin, fluorouracil, and docetaxel in unresectable head and neck cancer N Engl J Med 357 2007 1695 1704
5. M.R. Posner, D.M. Hershock, and C.R. Blajman et al. Cisplatin and fluorouracil alone or with docetaxel in head and neck cancer N Engl J Med 357 2007 1705 1715
6. T.Y. Seiwert, J.K. Salama, and E.E. Vokes The chemoradiation paradigm in head and neck cancer Nat Clin Pract Oncol 4 2007 156 171
7. X. Leon, M. Quer, and C. Orus et al. How much does it cost to preserve a larynx? An economic study Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 257 2000 72 76
8. US Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index, US medical care services. Available at http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifact8.htm. Accessed May 21, 2013.
9. Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Purchasing Power Parity Index. Available at http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?datasetcode=SNA- TABLE4#. Accessed May 25, 2013.
10. M. Drummond, M. Barbieri, and J. Cook et al. Transferability of economic evaluations across jurisdictions: ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force report Value Health 12 2009 409 418
11. D. Husereau, M. Drummond, and S. Petrou et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) - explanation and elaboration: A report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force Value Health 16 2013 231 250
12. M. Friedberg, B. Saffran, and T.J. Stinson et al. Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology JAMA 282 1999 1453 1457
13. A. Valachis, N.P. Polyzos, and A. Nearchou et al. Financial relationships in economic analyses of targeted therapies in oncology J Clin Oncol 30 2012 1316 1320
14. W. Nijdam, P. Levendag, and I. Noever et al. Cost analysis comparing brachytherapy versus surgery for primary carcinoma of the tonsillar fossa and/or soft palate Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59 2004 488 494
15. W. Nijdam, P. Levendag, and I. Noever et al. Cancer in the oropharynx: Cost calculation of different treatment modalities for controlled primaries, relapses and grade III/IV complications Radiother Oncol 77 2005 65 72
16. Department of Veterans Affairs Laryngeal Cancer Study Group Induction chemotherapy plus radiation compared with surgery plus radiation in patients with advanced laryngeal cancer N Engl J Med 324 1991 1685 1690
17. G.E. Davis, S.R. Schwartz, and D.L. Veenstra et al. Cost comparison of surgery vs organ preservation for laryngeal cancer Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 131 2005 21 26
18. S.F. Preuss, G. Quante, and R. Semrau et al. An analysis of surgical complications, morbidity, and cost calculation in patients undergoing multimodal treatment for operable oropharyngeal carcinoma Laryngoscope 117 2007 101 105
19. E.J. Moore, M.L. Hinni, and K.D. Olsen et al. Cost considerations in the treatment of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 146 2012 946 951
20. K.M. Higgins What treatment for early-stage glottic carcinoma among adult patients: CO2 endolaryngeal laser excision versus standard fractionated external beam radiation is superior in terms of cost utility? Laryngoscope 121 2011 116 134
21. A. Parthan, M.R. Posner, and C. Brammer et al. Cost utility of docetaxel as induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck Head Neck 31 2009 1255 1262
22. N.L. Liberato, C. Rognoni, and S. Rubrichi et al. Adding docetaxel to cisplatin and fluorouracil in patients with unresectable head and neck cancer: A cost-utility analysis Ann Oncol 23 2012 1825 1832
23. A. Brentani, G. de Castro Jr., and M.H. Federico Cost-effectiveness analysis of cisplatin-based chemoradiation to treat patients with unresectable, nonmetastatic head and neck cancer in Brazil Head Neck 33 2011 1199 1205
24. J.A. Bonner, P.M. Harari, and J. Giralt et al. Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck N Engl J Med 354 2006 567 578
25. Merck Pharmaceuticals. Merck Pharmaceuticals single technology, appraisal submission: Erbitux (cetuximab) for the treatment of locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA SCCHN). Available at http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11697/36792/36792.pdf. Accessed February 10, 2014.
26. B. Brown, A. Diamantopoulos, and J. Bernier et al. An economic evaluation of cetuximab combined with radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer in Belgium, France, Italy, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom Value Health 11 2008 791 799
27. A.L. Chan, H.W. Leung, and S.F. Huang Cost effectiveness of cetuximab concurrent with radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer in Taiwan: A decision-tree analysis Clin Drug Investig 31 2011 717 726
28. Sheets NC, Wheeler SB, Kohler RE, et al. Costs of Care in a Matched Pair Comparison of Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Versus Conventional Radiation Therapy (CRT) for the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2013 March 4 [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1097/COC.0b013e318282a850.
29. J.H. Yong, J. Beca, and B. O'Sullivan et al. Cost-effectiveness of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in oropharyngeal cancer Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 24 2012 532 538
30. J. Lundkvist, M. Ekman, and S.R. Ericsson et al. Proton therapy of cancer: Potential clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness Acta Oncol 44 2005 850 861
31. A. Peeters, J.P. Grutters, and M. Pijls-Johannesma et al. How costly is particle therapy? Cost analysis of external beam radiotherapy with carbon-ions, protons and photons Radiother Oncol 95 2010 45 53
32. B.L. Ramaekers, J.P. Grutters, and M. Pijls-Johannesma et al. Protons in head-and-neck cancer: Bridging the gap of evidence Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 85 2013 1282 1288
33. G. Fountzilas, P. Papakostas, and U. Dafni et al. Paclitaxel and gemcitabine vs. paclitaxel and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in advanced non-nasopharyngeal head and neck cancer. An efficacy and cost analysis randomized study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group Ann Oncol 17 2006 1560 1567
34. Merck Pharmaceuticals. Merck Pharmaceuticals single technology, appraisal submission: Erbitux (cetuximab) for the first line treatment of recurrent and/ or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Available at http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/MerckSerono.pdf. Accessed June 9, 2014.
35. J. Greenhalgh, A. Bagust, and A. Boland et al. Cetuximab for the treatment of recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck Health Technol Assess 13 Suppl. 3 2009 49 54
36. A. Bagust, J. Greenhalgh, and A. Boland et al. Cetuximab for recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A NICE single technology appraisal Pharmacoeconomics 28 2010 439 448
37. J.B. Vermorken, R. Mesia, and F. Rivera et al. Platinum-based chemotherapy plus cetuximab in head and neck cancer N Engl J Med 359 2008 1116 1127
38. M.B. Hannouf, C. Sehgal, and J.Q. Cao et al. Cost-effectiveness of adding cetuximab to platinum-based chemotherapy for first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer Med Care 7 2012 e38557
39. S. Griffin, S. Walker, and M. Sculpher et al. Cetuximab plus radiotherapy for the treatment of locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck Health Technol Assess 13 Suppl. 1 2009 49 54
40. K.K. Fu, T.F. Pajak, and A. Trotti et al. A Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) phase III randomized study to compare hyperfractionation and two variants of accelerated fractionation to standard fractionation radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: First report of RTOG 9003 Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 48 2000 7 16
41. J.P. Pignon, A. le Maitre, and E. Maillard et al. Meta-analysis of chemotherapy in head and neck cancer (MACH-NC): An update on 93 randomised trials and 17,346 patients Radiother Oncol 92 2009 4 14
42. H. Suit, H. Kooy, and A. Trofimov et al. Should positive phase III clinical trial data be required before proton beam therapy is more widely adopted? No Radiother Oncol 86 2008 148 153
43. P.F. Krabbe, L. Peerenboom, and B.S. Langenhoff et al. Responsiveness of the generic EQ-5D summary measure compared to the disease-specific EORTC QLQ C-30 Qual Life Res 13 2004 1247 1253
44. M. Drummond, M. Sculpher, and G. Torrance et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes 2005 Oxford University Press New York
45. M.R. Gold, J.E. Siegel, and L.B. Russell et al. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine 1996 Oxford University Press New York
46. A.K. Chaturvedi, E.A. Engels, and R.M. Pfeiffer et al. Human papillomavirus and rising oropharyngeal cancer incidence in the United States J Clin Oncol 29 2011 4294 4301
47. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Nice technology appraisal guidance 145: Cetuximab for the treatment of locally advanced squamous cell cancer of the head and neck. Available at http://www.nice.org.uk/ nicemedia/live/12006/40996/40996.pdf. Accessed June 8, 2014.
48. Ang KK, Zhang QE, Rosenthal DI, et al. A randomized phase III trial (RTOG 0522) of concurrent accelerated radiation plus cisplatin with or without cetuximab for stage III-IV head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNC). J Clin Oncol 2011;29(Suppl):Abstr 5500.
49. J.P. Jansen, R. Fleurence, and B. Devine et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: Part 1 Value Health 14 2011 417 428
50. K.L. Schulman, K. Berenson, and Y.C. Shih et al. A checklist for ascertaining study cohorts in oncology health services research using secondary data: Report of the ISPOR Oncology Good Outcomes Research Practices Working Group Value Health 16 2013 655 669
51. J.J. Caro, A.H. Briggs, and U. Siebert et al. Modeling good research practices - overview: A report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force - 1 Value Health 15 2012 796 803