TY - JOUR
T1 - Economic evaluation of breast cancer treatment
T2 - Considering the value of patient choice
AU - Polsky, Daniel
AU - Mandelblatt, Jeanne S.
AU - Weeks, Jane C.
AU - Venditti, Laura
AU - Hwang, Yi Ting
AU - Click, Henry A.
AU - Hadley, Jack
AU - Schulman, Kevin A.
PY - 2003/3/15
Y1 - 2003/3/15
N2 - Purpose: To use 5 years of primary data to compare the incremental cost-effectiveness of breast conservation and radiation versus mastectomy with the restriction of choice to a single therapy versus providing a choice of either therapy. Patients and Methods: We evaluated a random retrospective cohort of 2,517 Medicare beneficiaries treated for newly diagnosed stage I or II breast cancer from 1992 through 1994. The outcome measures were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and 5-year medical costs. Risk and propensity score adjustments were used in the analysis. Results: A breast conservation and radiation regimen has significantly higher costs than mastectomy in the first year after surgery; the adjusted 5-year costs are $14,054 (95% confidence interval, $9,791 to $18,312) greater than those of mastectomy. The adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing breast conservation and radiation to mastectomy was $219,594 per QALY for the comparison of the two strategies. If the possibility of patient choice from maintaining the availability of multiple treatments versus restricting choice to mastectomy alone provides a quality-of-life gain of 0.031 QALYs, then the cost-effectiveness ratio of this choice option is $80,440 per QALY. Conclusion: The current system of providing a choice between mastectomy and breast conservation surgery is economically attractive when the economic analysis includes the benefit of patient choice of treatment.
AB - Purpose: To use 5 years of primary data to compare the incremental cost-effectiveness of breast conservation and radiation versus mastectomy with the restriction of choice to a single therapy versus providing a choice of either therapy. Patients and Methods: We evaluated a random retrospective cohort of 2,517 Medicare beneficiaries treated for newly diagnosed stage I or II breast cancer from 1992 through 1994. The outcome measures were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and 5-year medical costs. Risk and propensity score adjustments were used in the analysis. Results: A breast conservation and radiation regimen has significantly higher costs than mastectomy in the first year after surgery; the adjusted 5-year costs are $14,054 (95% confidence interval, $9,791 to $18,312) greater than those of mastectomy. The adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing breast conservation and radiation to mastectomy was $219,594 per QALY for the comparison of the two strategies. If the possibility of patient choice from maintaining the availability of multiple treatments versus restricting choice to mastectomy alone provides a quality-of-life gain of 0.031 QALYs, then the cost-effectiveness ratio of this choice option is $80,440 per QALY. Conclusion: The current system of providing a choice between mastectomy and breast conservation surgery is economically attractive when the economic analysis includes the benefit of patient choice of treatment.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037445187&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037445187&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1200/JCO.2003.03.126
DO - 10.1200/JCO.2003.03.126
M3 - Article
C2 - 12637482
AN - SCOPUS:0037445187
SN - 0732-183X
VL - 21
SP - 1139
EP - 1146
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
IS - 6
ER -