Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
PharmacoEconomics - Open
Published in: PharmacoEconomics - Open 1/2024

Open Access 30-11-2023 | Original Research Article

Early Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer Patients with Limited Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

Authors: Joost G. E. Verbeek, Karen van der Sluis, Marieke A. Vollebergh, Johanna W. van Sandick, Wim H. van Harten, Valesca P. Retèl

Published in: PharmacoEconomics - Open | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Gastric cancer patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) have a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival of 10 months when treated with systemic chemotherapy only. Cohort studies showed that cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) might improve the prognosis for gastric cancer patients with limited PC. Besides generating trial data on clinical effectiveness, it is crucial to timely collect information on economic aspects to guide the reimbursement decision-making process. No previous data have been published on the cost(-effectiveness) of CRS/HIPEC in this group of patients. Therefore, we performed an early model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of CRS/HIPEC for gastric cancer patients with limited PC in the Dutch setting.

Methods

We constructed a two-state (alive-dead) Markov transition model to evaluate costs and clinical outcomes from a Dutch healthcare perspective. Clinical outcomes, transition probabilities and utilities were derived from literature and verified by clinical experts in the field. Costs were measured using two available representative cohorts (2010–2017): one ‘systemic chemotherapy only’ cohort and one ‘CRS/HIPEC’ cohort (n = 10 each). Incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) were expressed as Euros per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). We performed probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity, scenario, and value-of-information analyses using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of €80,000/QALY, which reflects the Dutch norm for severe diseases.

Results

In the base-case analysis, CRS/HIPEC yielded more QALYs (increment of 0.68) and more costs (increment of €34,706) compared with systemic chemotherapy only, resulting in an ICUR of €50,990/QALY. The probability that CRS/HIPEC was cost effective compared with systemic chemotherapy alone was 64%. To reduce uncertainty, the expected value of perfect information amounted to €4,021,468. The scenario analyses did not alter the results and showed that treatment costs, lifetime health-related quality of life and overall survival had the largest influence on the model.

Conclusions

The presented early cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that adding CRS/HIPEC to systemic chemotherapy for gastric cancer patients with limited PC has a good chance of being cost-effectiveness compared with systemic chemotherapy alone when using a WTP of €80,000/QALY. However, there is substantial uncertainty in view of the current available data on effectiveness. Results from the ongoing phase III PERISCOPE II trial are therefore crucial for further decisions on treatment policy and its cost-effectiveness.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–49.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Koemans WJ, Lurvink RJ, Grootscholten C, Verhoeven RHA, de Hingh IH, van Sandick JW. Synchronous peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer origin: incidence, treatment and survival of a nationwide Dutch cohort. Gastric Cancer. 2021;24:800–9.PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
5.
Gill RS, Al-Adra DP, Nagendran J, Campbell S, Shi X, Haase E, et al. Treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis by cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC: a systematic review of survival, mortality, and morbidity. J Surg Oncol. 2011;104(6):692–8.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Dellinger TH, Han ES. State of the science: the role of HIPEC in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2021;160(2):364–8.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Van Stein RM, Aalbers AGJ, Sonke GS, Van Driel WJ. Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Ovarian and Colorectal Cancer: A Review. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(8):1231–8.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Lordick F, Carneiro F, Cascinu S, Fleitas T, Haustermans K, Piessen G, et al. Gastric cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2022;33:1851–8.CrossRef
9.
Granieri S, Bonomi A, Frassini S, Chierici AP, Bruno F, Paleino S, et al. Prognostic impact of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in gastric cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021;47(11):2757–67.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Bonnot P-E, Piessen G, Kepenekian V, Decullier E, Pocard M, Meunier B, et al. Cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases (CYTO-CHIP study): a propensity score analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:2028–40.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Rau B, Brandl A, Piso P, Pelz J, Busch P, Demtröder C, et al. Peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer: results from the German database. Gastric Cancer. 2020;23:11–22.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Manzanedo I, Pereira F, Rihuete Caro C, Pérez-Viejo E, Serrano Á, Gutiérrez Calvo A, et al. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis: multicenter study of Spanish Group of Peritoneal Oncologic Surgery (GECOP). Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:2615–21.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Marano L, Marrelli D, Sammartino P, Biacchi D, Graziosi L, Marino E, et al. Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer with Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases: Multicenter Study of ‘Italian Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Oncoteam—S.I.C.O.’ Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:9060–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
15.
Koemans WJ, Van Der Kaaij RT, Boot H, Buffart T, Veenhof AAFA, Hartemink KJ, et al. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus palliative systemic chemotherapy in stomach cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination, the study protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (PERISCOPE II). BMC Cancer. 2019;19(1):420.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
16.
Trueman P, Grainger DL, Downs KE. Coverage with evidence development: applications and issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26(1):79–85.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Miquel-Cases A, Schouten PC, Steuten LMG, Retèl VP, Linn SC, van Harten WH. (Very) Early technology assessment and translation of predictive biomarkers in breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rev. 2017;52:117–27.PubMedCrossRef
18.
19.
Ijzerman MJ, Steuten LMG. Early assessment of medical technologies to inform product development and market access: a review of methods and applications. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2011;9(5):331–47.PubMedCrossRef
20.
IJzerman MJ, Koffijberg H, Fenwick E, Krahn M. Emerging use of early health technology assessment in medical product development: a scoping review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35:727–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Rodriguez Llorian E, Waliji LA, Dragojlovic N, Michaux KD, Nagase F, Lynd LD. Frameworks for health technology assessment at an early stage of product development: a review and roadmap to guide applications. Value Health. 2023;26:1258–69.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Grutters JPC, Govers T, Nijboer J, Tummers M, van der Wilt GJ, Rovers MM. Problems and promises of health technologies: the role of early health economic modeling. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019;8:575–82.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
Briggs AH, Weinstein MC, Fenwick EAL, Karnon J, Sculpher MJ, Paltiel AD. Model parameter estimation and uncertainty: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM modeling good research practices task force-6. Value in Health. 2012;15:722–32.CrossRef
24.
Kanters TA, Bouwmans CAM, Van Der Linden N, Tan SS, Hakkaart-van RL. Update of the Dutch manual for costing studies in health care. PLoS ONE. 2017;12: e0187477.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
25.
Siebert U, Alagoz O, Bayoumi AM, Jahn B, Owens DK, Cohen DJ, et al. State-transition modeling: A report of the ISPOR-SMDM modeling good research practices task force-3. Value in Health. 2012;15:812–20.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Wilke H, Muro K, Van Cutsem E, Oh SC, Bodoky G, Shimada Y, et al. Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): A double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1224–35.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Abdel-Rahman O. Prognostic impact of baseline quality of life status among patients with advanced gastric cancer; results from two randomized studies. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2019;19:1–5.CrossRef
28.
Husereau D, Drummond M, Augustovski F, de Bekker-Grob E, Briggs AH, Carswell C, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 Explanation and Elaboration: A Report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force. Value in Health. 2022;25:10–31.PubMedCrossRef
29.
van der Kaaij RT, Wassenaar ECE, Koemans WJ, Sikorska K, Grootscholten C, Los M, et al. Treatment of PERItoneal disease in Stomach Cancer with cytOreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraPEritoneal chemotherapy: PERISCOPE I initial results. Br J Surg. 2020;107:1520–8.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Du Bois D. Clinical calorimetry. Arch Intern Med. 1916;XVII:863–71.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
Chia CS, Seshadri RA, Kepenekian V, Vaudoyer D, Passot G, Glehen O. Survival outcomes after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer: a systematic review. Pleura Peritoneum. 2016;1(2):67–77.
36.
Thomassen I, Van Gestel YR, Van Ramshorst B, Luyer MD, Bosscha K, Nienhuijs SW, et al. Peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin: a population-based study on incidence, survival and risk factors. Int J Cancer. 2014;134(3):622–8.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Rudloff U, Langan RC, Mullinax JE, Beane JD, Steinberg SM, Beresnev T, et al. Impact of maximal cytoreductive surgery plus regional heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) on outcome of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin: Results of the GYMSSA trial. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110:275–84.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
38.
Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
39.
Al-Batran S-E, Van Cutsem E, Oh SC, Bodoky G, Shimada Y, Hironaka S, et al. Quality-of-life and performance status results from the phase III RAINBOW study of ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:673–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
Leimkühler M, Hentzen JEKR, Hemmer PHJ, Been LB, van Ginkel RJ, Kruijff S, et al. Systematic review of factors affecting quality of life after cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27:3973–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
Seretis C, Youssef H. Quality of life after cytoreductive surgery and intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancies: A systematic review. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40(12):1605–13.PubMedCrossRef
42.
van Amelsfoort RM, van der Sluis K, Schats W, Jansen EPM, van Sandick JW, Verheij M, et al. Health-related quality of life in locally advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13(23):5934.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
43.
Gubanski M, Glimelius B, Lind PA. Quality of life in patients with advanced gastric cancer sequentially treated with docetaxel and irinotecan with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid (leucovin). Med Oncol. 2014;31:906.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Versteegh MM, Ramos IC, Buyukkaramikli NC, Ansaripour A, Reckers-Droog VT, Brouwer WBF. Severity-adjusted probability of being cost effective. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(9):1155–63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
45.
Reckers-Droog VT, van Exel NJA, Brouwer WBF. Looking back and moving forward: on the application of proportional shortfall in healthcare priority setting in the Netherlands. Health Policy (New York). 2018;122(6):621–9.CrossRef
46.
Oostenbrink JB, Al MJ, Oppe M, Rutten-Van Mölken MPMH. Expected value of perfect information: an empirical example of reducing decision uncertainty by conducting additional research. Value in Health. 2008;11(7):1070–80.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Wilson ECF. A practical guide to value of information analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33:105–21.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Fenwick E, Steuten L, Knies S, Ghabri S, Basu A, Murray JF, et al. Value of information analysis for research decisions—an introduction: report 1 of the ISPOR Value of Information Analysis Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value in Health. 2020;23:139–50.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Kunst N, Siu A, Drummond M, Grimm S, Grutters J, Husereau D, et al. CHEERS value of information (CHEERS-VOI) reporting standards—explanation and elaboration. Value Health. 2023;26(10):1461–73.PubMedCrossRef
50.
51.
Janjigian YY, Shitara K, Moehler M, Garrido M, Salman P, Shen L, et al. First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (CheckMate 649): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. The Lancet. 2021;398:27–40.CrossRef
52.
Metadata
Title
Early Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer Patients with Limited Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
Authors
Joost G. E. Verbeek
Karen van der Sluis
Marieke A. Vollebergh
Johanna W. van Sandick
Wim H. van Harten
Valesca P. Retèl
Publication date
30-11-2023
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics - Open / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 2509-4262
Electronic ISSN: 2509-4254
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-023-00454-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

PharmacoEconomics - Open 1/2024 Go to the issue

Acknowledgement to Referees

Acknowledgement to Referees

Original Research Article

The Acceptance of Indirect Treatment Comparison Methods in Oncology by Health Technology Assessment Agencies in England, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain

Original Research Article

Cost of Patients with Alzheimer’s Disease in Spain According to Disease Severity

Original Research Article

Public Health Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Empagliflozin (JARDIANCE®) in the Treatment of Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction in France, Based on the EMPEROR-Preserved Clinical Trial

Original Research Article

Specialist Palliative Care and Health Care Costs at the End of Life

Original Research Article

Economic Burden of Delayed Diagnosis in Patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH)