Evaluating the cost-utility of intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin versus radical cystectomy in patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the UK.

AIMS: Approximately 75% of bladder cancer (BC) cases present as non-muscle-invasive BC (NMIBC). In patients with high-risk NMIBC, the mainstay treatment is intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), with immediate radical cystectomy (RC) as an alternative treatment option. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-utility of BCG versus RC in patients with high-risk NMIBC from the UK healthcare payer perspective.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

A six-state Markov model was developed that covered controlled disease, recurrence, progression to muscle-invasive BC, metastatic disease, and death. The model included adverse events of BCG and RC and monitoring and palliative care. Drug costs were obtained from the British National Formulary. Intravesical delivery, RC, and monitoring costs were sourced from the National Tariff Payment System and the literature. Utility data were obtained from the literature. Analyses were run over a 30-year time horizon, with future costs and effects discounted at 3.5% per annum. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The base case analysis comparing BCG with RC showed that BCG would increase life expectancy by 0.88 years versus RC, from 7.74 to 8.62 years. BCG resulted in an increase of 0.76 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus RC, from 5.63 to 6.39 QALYs. Patients incurred lower lifetime costs if treated with BCG (£47,753) than with RC (£64,264). Cost savings were mainly driven by the lower cost of BCG versus RC, and palliative care costs. Sensitivity analyses showed that results were robust to assumptions.

LIMITATIONS: The evidence base informing efficacy estimates of BCG is heterogeneous as different BCG administration schedules were reported in the literature, while incidence and cost data on some BCG-associated adverse events were sparse.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravesical BCG led to increased QALYs and reduced costs versus RC for patients with high-risk NMIBC from the UK healthcare payer perspective.