Health Services Research

PV QA 3 - Poster Viewing Q&A 3

TU_35_2945 - Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of Image Guided Partial Breast Irradiation Compared to Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation

Tuesday, October 23
1:00 PM - 2:30 PM
Location: Innovation Hub, Exhibit Hall 3

Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of Image Guided Partial Breast Irradiation Compared to Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation
C. S. Shah1, M. C. Ward2, and M. Singer3; 1Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 2Southeast Radiation Oncology Group, Charlotte, NC, 3Case Western University, Cleveland, OH

Purpose/Objective(s): Hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) and accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) represent two adjuvant radiation therapy options following breast conserving surgery. The purpose of this analysis is to examine the cost efficacy and costing of an external beam image guided APBI technique compared to HWBI.

Materials/Methods: HWBI was defined as 40 Gy/15 fractions to the whole breast with or without a 10 Gy/5 fraction boost. APBI was 30 Gy/5 fractions per Livi et al and was evaluated as both IMRT and SBRT. The model included rates of local recurrence, distant metastases, survival as well as acute toxicity. Reimbursement was based on Medicare 2017 reimbursement rates. A cost effectiveness analysis was performed using a payer model as was a societal model that incorporated indirect costs. A costing analysis for each technique was also performed.

Results: Reimbursement (payor model) for HWBI with or without boost was $9,174/$7,476 while reimbursement for APBI was $6,529/$11,510 for IMRT and SBRT approaches respectively. Accounting for indirect costs, the total cost was $10,783/$8,750 for HWBI with and without boost and $7,133/$12,113 for APBI IMRT/SBRT. APBI delivered with IMRT had a higher total utility and lower cost, dominating HWBI with or without boost; as such a sensitivity analysis was not performed. APBI billed as SBRT was not cost-effective with a cost/QALY of $1,209,090/QALY and $3,058,181/QALY as compared to HWBI with or without a boost. With respect to costing, the cost associated with APBI delivery was $3,125 as compared to $4,589/$3,748 for HWBI with and without boost.

Conclusion: Image-guided partial breast irradiation is cost effective compared to hypofractionated WBI. Delivered with IMRT, such an approach was less costly than hypofractionation with or without a boost. When evaluating the technique on a larger scale, this would translate into $3.7 million/$1.6 million cost savings per thousand patients who receive EBRT APBI as compared to HWBI with or without boost. Image guided APBI with IMRT should be considered a standard of care option in appropriately selected patients based on efficacy and value.

Author Disclosure: C.S. Shah: Employee; Cleveland Clinic Foundation. Consultant; Impedimed. M.C. Ward: None. M. Singer: Consultant; Consultant.

Send Email for Chirag Shah


Assets

TU_35_2945 - Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of Image Guided Partial Breast Irradiation Compared to Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation



Attendees who have favorited this

Please enter your access key

The asset you are trying to access is locked. Please enter your access key to unlock.

Send Email for Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of Image Guided Partial Breast Irradiation Compared to Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation