QOLP-09. HEALTH ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF LOW-GRADE GLIOMA MANAGEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW. (9th November 2020)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- QOLP-09. HEALTH ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF LOW-GRADE GLIOMA MANAGEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW. (9th November 2020)
- Main Title:
- QOLP-09. HEALTH ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF LOW-GRADE GLIOMA MANAGEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
- Authors:
- Hamidi, Nima
Fernandez, Ajay
Tuohy, Kyle
Mansouri, Alireza - Abstract:
- Abstract: BACKGROUND: Diffuse low-grade gliomas (DLGGs, WHO Grade II gliomas) comprise 13-16% of all primary brain tumors. Although there has been a paradigmatic shift toward upfront maximal safe resection (MSR) for these heterogeneous tumors, it is important to consider the health economic perspective of this approach, compared with the traditional watch-and-wait approach, as well. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the health economic literature on the range of DLGG management options. METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, Medline, EMBASE, The Central Registration Depository (CRD), EconPapers, and EconLit were searched for 'cost-effectiveness', 'health economics' and 'Low-grade glioma'. Grade I tumors were excluded. Pre-specified variables were extracted. All currencies were converted to USD. RESULTS: Among 258 abstracts, 28 were selected for full-text screening, and 3 were selected for this review. A European study evaluated the role of intraoperative electrical stimulation (IES). Although IES was associated with higher direct costs upfront ($38, 662.70 vs $32, 116.10), this was offset by less long-term indirect costs ($12, 222.30 vs $31, 927.10; p =0.023), greater QALY (4.8 vs 2.9; p =0.001), and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $1, 842.50. Another study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant PCV+RT vs RT alone, finding greater QALY for the former (9.94 vs 5.17) and an ICER of $10, 186 per QALY gained. A third study evaluated theAbstract: BACKGROUND: Diffuse low-grade gliomas (DLGGs, WHO Grade II gliomas) comprise 13-16% of all primary brain tumors. Although there has been a paradigmatic shift toward upfront maximal safe resection (MSR) for these heterogeneous tumors, it is important to consider the health economic perspective of this approach, compared with the traditional watch-and-wait approach, as well. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the health economic literature on the range of DLGG management options. METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, Medline, EMBASE, The Central Registration Depository (CRD), EconPapers, and EconLit were searched for 'cost-effectiveness', 'health economics' and 'Low-grade glioma'. Grade I tumors were excluded. Pre-specified variables were extracted. All currencies were converted to USD. RESULTS: Among 258 abstracts, 28 were selected for full-text screening, and 3 were selected for this review. A European study evaluated the role of intraoperative electrical stimulation (IES). Although IES was associated with higher direct costs upfront ($38, 662.70 vs $32, 116.10), this was offset by less long-term indirect costs ($12, 222.30 vs $31, 927.10; p =0.023), greater QALY (4.8 vs 2.9; p =0.001), and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $1, 842.50. Another study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant PCV+RT vs RT alone, finding greater QALY for the former (9.94 vs 5.17) and an ICER of $10, 186 per QALY gained. A third study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of adding 18 F-fluoroethyl-L-tyrosine (FET) PET to MRI, compared to preoperative MRI alone. This resulted in an ICER of $7, 193.58 for the baseline scenario (lowest reimbursement) and $10, 236.12 for the morbidity-adjusted reimbursement rate scenario (highest reimbursement). There were no studies evaluating the health economics of maximal upfront surgical resection to the watch-and-wait approach. CONCLUSION: We found a limited number of studies reporting on the health economics of DLGGs. Given the paradigmatic transition toward more aggressive upfront surgical resection, DLGG-specific health economic analyses are underway. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Neuro-oncology. Volume 22(2020)Supplement 2
- Journal:
- Neuro-oncology
- Issue:
- Volume 22(2020)Supplement 2
- Issue Display:
- Volume 22, Issue 2 (2020)
- Year:
- 2020
- Volume:
- 22
- Issue:
- 2
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2020-0022-0002-0000
- Page Start:
- ii176
- Page End:
- ii176
- Publication Date:
- 2020-11-09
- Subjects:
- Brain Neoplasms -- Periodicals
Brain -- Tumors -- Periodicals
Brain -- Cancer -- Periodicals
Nervous system -- Cancer -- Periodicals
616.99481 - Journal URLs:
- http://neuro-oncology.dukejournals.org/ ↗
http://neuro-oncology.oxfordjournals.org/ ↗
http://www.oxfordjournals.org/content?genre=journal&issn=1522-8517 ↗
http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1093/neuonc/noaa215.734 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1522-8517
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 6081.288000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 15461.xml