MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1097/coc.0000000000000339

Медицинская библиотека · American journal of clinical oncology · 2018

Clinical and Economic Evaluation of Treatment Strategies for T1N0 Anal Canal Cancer.

Deshmukh Ashish A, Zhao Hui, Das Prajnan, Chiao Elizabeth Y, You Yi-Qian Nancy, Franzini Luisa, Lairson David R, Swartz Michael D, Giordano Sharon H, Cantor Scott B

СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

A comparative assessment of treatment alternatives for T1N0 anal canal cancer has never been conducted. We compared the outcomes associated with the treatment alternatives-chemoradiotherapy (CRT), radiotherapy (RT), and surgery or ablation techniques (surgery/ablation)-for T1N0 anal canal cancer.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registries linked with Medicare longitudinal data (SEER-Medicare database). Analysis included 190 patients who were treated for T1N0 anal canal cancer using surgery/ablation (n=44), RT (n=50), or CRT (n=96). The outcomes were reported in terms of survival and hazards ratios using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards modeling, respectively; lifetime costs; and cost-effectiveness measured in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, that is, the ratio of the difference in costs between the 2 alternatives to the difference in effectiveness between the same 2 alternatives.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the survival duration between the treatment groups as predicted by the Kaplan-Meier curves. After adjusting for patient characteristics and propensity score, the hazard ratio of death for the patients who received CRT compared with surgery/ablation was 1.742 (95% confidence interval, 0.793-3.829) and RT was 2.170 (95% confidence interval, 0.923-5.101); however, the relationship did not reach statistical significance. Surgery/ablation resulted in lower lifetime cost than RT or CRT. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with CRT compared with surgery/ablation was $142,883 per life year gained.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no statistically significant difference in survival among the treatment alternatives for T1N0 anal canal cancer. Given that surgery/ablation costs less than RT or CRT and might be cost-effective compared with RT and CRT, it is crucial to explore this finding further in this era of limited health care resources.

Для цитирования: Deshmukh Ashish A, Zhao Hui, Das Prajnan, Chiao Elizabeth Y, You Yi-Qian Nancy, Franzini Luisa, Lairson David R, Swartz Michael D, Giordano Sharon H, Cantor Scott B. Clinical and Economic Evaluation of Treatment Strategies for T1N0 Anal Canal Cancer.. American journal of clinical oncology. 2018. DOI: 10.1097/coc.0000000000000339.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.