Journal of medical economics · 2025
Economic impact of MAF testing for adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy in early breast cancer: a multi-regional budget impact analysis from a payer perspective.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Carapinha João L, Tercero Juan Carlos, van den Berg Ralf, Servitja Sònia, Jean-Mairet Joël, Gomis Roger R, Carapinha René
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy, like zoledronic acid (ZOL), is recommended for postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer to lower bone metastasis risk and improve survival. Benefits vary by genetic markers. This analysis evaluated the economic impact of using the MAF Test to guide ZOL decisions based on MAF gene status compared to the traditional menopausal status-based approach in breast cancer patients across regions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision-tree and Markov model evaluated clinical outcomes and costs of breast cancer management from a healthcare payer's perspective in North America and Europe. Patient distributions by MAF status and clinical outcomes were derived from the AZURE trial (n = 3,359). Budget impact was analyzed over 10 years for a cohort based on cases per 100,000 individuals, with sensitivity analyses assessing uncertainty.
RESULTS: MAF testing resulted in substantial savings over 10 years, totaling €105,114,157 for MAF-negative patients due to improved outcomes and reduced recurrence costs. Mean savings were €2,732 per postmenopausal patient and €2,150 per premenopausal patient. Compared to current practice, MAF testing offered higher savings, with incremental savings of €787 per postmenopausal and €1,317 per premenopausal patient, with the USA showing the highest savings (€1,959 and €3,275, respectively). MAF-positive postmenopausal patients on treatment incurred additional costs of €53,052,458 over 10 years (mean incremental cost: €4,289 per patient), highlighting avoidable expenses. Savings were most pronounced in the first 5 years (59.2%-80.6% of total impact), with consistent findings across countries.
CONCLUSION: The MAF Test offers a personalized approach, delivering substantial savings by optimizing treatment and preventing harm to MAF-positive patients. Although initial testing costs are involved, long-term benefits from reduced recurrence and adverse outcomes suggest a favorable budget impact beyond 10 years. These findings support integrating MAF testing into clinical practice to enhance both clinical efficacy and cost-efficiency in breast cancer care.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision-tree and Markov model evaluated clinical outcomes and costs of breast cancer management from a healthcare payer's perspective in North America and Europe. Patient distributions by MAF status and clinical outcomes were derived from the AZURE trial (n = 3,359). Budget impact was analyzed over 10 years for a cohort based on cases per 100,000 individuals, with sensitivity analyses assessing uncertainty.
RESULTS: MAF testing resulted in substantial savings over 10 years, totaling €105,114,157 for MAF-negative patients due to improved outcomes and reduced recurrence costs. Mean savings were €2,732 per postmenopausal patient and €2,150 per premenopausal patient. Compared to current practice, MAF testing offered higher savings, with incremental savings of €787 per postmenopausal and €1,317 per premenopausal patient, with the USA showing the highest savings (€1,959 and €3,275, respectively). MAF-positive postmenopausal patients on treatment incurred additional costs of €53,052,458 over 10 years (mean incremental cost: €4,289 per patient), highlighting avoidable expenses. Savings were most pronounced in the first 5 years (59.2%-80.6% of total impact), with consistent findings across countries.
CONCLUSION: The MAF Test offers a personalized approach, delivering substantial savings by optimizing treatment and preventing harm to MAF-positive patients. Although initial testing costs are involved, long-term benefits from reduced recurrence and adverse outcomes suggest a favorable budget impact beyond 10 years. These findings support integrating MAF testing into clinical practice to enhance both clinical efficacy and cost-efficiency in breast cancer care.