论文部分内容阅读
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization(TACE) and TACE in combination with sorafenib(TACEsorafenib) have shown a significant survival benefit for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC). Adopting either as a first-line therapy carries major cost and resource implications. The objective of this study was to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of TACE against TACE-sorafenib for unresectable HCC using a decision analytic model.METHODS: A Markov cohort model was developed to compare TACE and TACE-sorafenib. Transition probabilities and utilities were obtained from systematic literature reviews, and costs were obtained from West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China. Survival benefits were reported in quality-adjusted life-years(QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio(ICER) was calculated. Sensitive analysis was performed by varying potentially modifiable parameters of the model.RESULTS: The base-case analysis showed that TACE cost $26 951 and yielded survival of 0.71 QALYs, and TACE-sorafenib cost $44 542 and yielded survival of 1.02 QALYs in the entire treatment. The ICER of TACE-sorafenib versus TACE was $56 745 per QALY gained, which was above threshold for cost-effectiveness in China. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the major driver of ICER was the cost post TACE-sorafenib therapy with stable state.CONCLUSION: TACE is a more cost-effective strategy than TACE-sorafenib for the treatment of unresectable HCC.
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) and TACE in combination with sorafenib (TACE sorafenib) have shown a significant survival benefit for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Adopting either as a first-line therapy carries major cost and resource implications. The objective of this study was to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of TACE against TACE-sorafenib for unresectable HCC using a decision analytic model. METHODS: A Markov cohort model was developed to compare TACE and TACE-sorafenib. Transition probabilities and utilities were obtained from systematic literature reviews, and costs were obtained from West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China. Survival benefits were reported in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. RESULT: The base-case analysis showed that TACE cost $ 26 951 and yielded survival of 0.71 QALYs, and TACE-sorafenib cost $ 44 542 and yielded survival of 1.02 QALYs in the entire treatment. The ICER of TACE-sorafenib versus TACE was $ 56 745 per QALY gained, which was above threshold for cost-effectiveness in China Sensitivity analysis revealed that the major driver of ICER was the cost post TACE-sorafenib therapy with stable state. CONCLUSION: TACE is a more cost-effective strategy than TACE-sorafenib for the treatment of unresectable HCC.