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

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

16 Scopus citations

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)626-631
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials
Volume41
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2018

Keywords

  • T1N0
  • anal cancer
  • cost-effectiveness
  • outcomes
  • stage I
  • survival

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical and Economic Evaluation of Treatment Strategies for T1N0 Anal Canal Cancer'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this