Jacobs V.R.,Paracelsus Medical University |
Kates R.E.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich |
Kantelhardt E.,Martin Luther University of Halle Wittenberg |
Vetter M.,Martin Luther University of Halle Wittenberg |
And 7 more authors.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Year: 2013
Invasion factors uPA/PAI-1 are guideline-recommended (ASCO, AGO) biomarkers for decision support regarding adjuvant chemotherapy (CTX) in women with primary breast cancer. They define a high-risk group with strong benefit from adjuvant CTX and a low-risk group with uncertain benefit and excellent survival without CTX. In a target population (age > 35/N0/G2/HR+/HER2-), administration of adjuvant CTX is not mandatory in Germany and other countries. Based on existing data, this economic model was developed to determine for the first time health economic impact of uPA/PAI-1 testing. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) resulting from uPA/PAI-1 testing was estimated for the target population by Markov modeling and sensitivity analysis. Survival data, CTX-uPA/PAI-1 interactions, and uPA/PAI-1 hazard ratios were derived from the Chemo N0 trial and other evidence. Incremental costs were computed from a payer's perspective appropriate to the German setting. Incremental effectiveness in life years (ly) was estimated taking into account age-adjusted life expectancy, disease-free survival (with/without CTX), and 2 years post-relapse survival. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying residual adjuvant CTX benefit in the low-risk group, denoted HR-CTX(LR), in range 0.8-0.99. All patients receive adjuvant endocrine therapy. Test is restricted to patients willing to forgo CTX if both markers are below specific cut-off values and to undergo CTX otherwise. For a typical 55-year-old patient, comparing to an "all-CTX" strategy without the test, ICER (all-CTX vs. test) > €50,000 if HR-CTX(LR) > 0.85, with savings of €18,500 per low-risk patient attributable to the test. The cost-effectiveness of forgoing CTX is very high as HR-CTX(LR) approaches one. Conversely, comparing to a "no-CTX" strategy (e.g., patients who initially refuse CTX) without the test, the test is very cost-effective at all ages in the target group if high-risk patients are willing to undergo CTX: ICER (test vs. no-CTX) < €6,000 at age 55 and even better at younger ages, remaining < €25,000 up to age 75. The main determinants of cost utility are age and residual CTX benefit in low-uPA/PAI-1 patients. The uPA/PAI-1 test is cost-effective in the target group compared to either an "all-CTX" or a "no-CTX" scenario. This model thus lends health economic support to current guideline recommendations that uPA/PAI-1 testing is beneficial for BC patients with no lymph node involvement. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York. Source
Jacobs V.R.,Frauenklinik OB GYN |
Jacobs V.R.,University of Cologne |
Rasche L.,Universitatsklinikum |
Harbeck N.,Frauenklinik OB GYN |
And 4 more authors.
Onkologie | Year: 2010
Background: From the clinic's point of view economic patient care requires comparison and adjustment of costs to revenues. To verify cost coverage for implants in mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction, a comprehensive cost-reimbursement analysis was performed. Methods: Retrospective analysis of the German diagnosis-related group (G-DRG) revenues for implants from the DRG Browser 2007/2009HA and comparison with actual costs for implants in 2009 from the annual clinic report and the database of the controlling department. Calculation of the relative cost coverage for implants in unilateral (DRG J06Z) and bilateral mastectomy (DRG J16Z). Results: In 2009, n = 98 J06Z and n = 18 J16Z were performed. DRG-calculated expenses for implants were € 69.65 for J06Z and € 123.07 for J16Z, i.e. a total of € 9,040.96. Actual costs for all implants were € 121,645.60, mean € 699.11 (€ 404.94-1,171.44). Attributable implant costs for 100% immediate breast reconstruction rate were € 93,679.28. Thus, implants are not cost covering by -90.3% (-82.8 to -94.7%). Subsidies for implants from the clinic's budget range from € 335.29 to €2,219.81 per case. Conclusions: Immediate breast reconstruction with implants after mastectomy is - even 6 years after introduction of the DRGs - not adequately calculated to be cost covering since the actual implant costs exceed the calculated revenues by far. At present, these implants are subsidized by the clinic at, on average, 90.3%. If economic patient care is mandatory, a maximum of only 1 in 10 patients with mastectomy can be offered immediate breast reconstruction with implants in Germany. Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel. Source