Cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene assay for guiding adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in early breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES Adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in early breast cancer are complex. The 21-gene assay can potentially aid such decisions, but costs US $4175 per patient. Adjuvant! Online is a freely available decision aid. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using the 21-gene assay in conjunction with Adjuvant! Online, and of providing adjuvant chemotherapy conditional upon risk classification. METHODS A probabilistic Markov decision model simulated risk classification, treatment, and the natural history of breast cancer in a hypothetical cohort of 50-year-old women with lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor- and/or progesterone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2/neu-negative early breast cancer. Cost-effectiveness was considered from an Ontario public-payer perspective by deriving the lifetime incremental cost (2012 Canadian dollars) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for each strategy, and the probability each strategy is cost-effective, assuming a willingness-to-pay of $50,000 per QALY. RESULTS The 21-gene assay has an incremental cost per QALY in patients at low, intermediate, or high Adjuvant Online! risk of $22,440 (probability cost-effective 78.46%), $2,526 (99.40%), or $1,111 (99.82%), respectively. In patients at low (high) 21-gene assay risk, adjuvant chemotherapy increases (reduces) costs and worsens (improves) health outcomes. For patients at intermediate 21-gene assay risk and low, intermediate, or high Adjuvant! Online risk, chemotherapy has an incremental cost per QALY of $44,088 (50.59%), $1,776 (77.65%), or $1,778 (82.31%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The 21-gene assay appears cost-effective, regardless of Adjuvant! Online risk. Adjuvant chemotherapy appears cost-effective for patients at intermediate or high 21-gene assay risk, although this finding is uncertain in patients at intermediate 21-gene assay and low Adjuvant! Online risk.

[1]  D. Hayes,et al.  Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[2]  Gary H Lyman,et al.  Economic analysis of targeting chemotherapy using a 21-gene RT-PCR assay in lymph-node-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer. , 2005, The American journal of managed care.

[3]  J. Bryan S31 Toward a More Rational Selection of Tailored AdjuvantTherapy: Data from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project , 2005 .

[4]  T. Vandenberg,et al.  Febrile neutropenia rates with adjuvant docetaxel and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in early breast cancer: discrepancy between published reports and community practice-a retrospective analysis. , 2010, Current oncology.

[5]  A. Lalonde Canadian Institute for Health Information. , 1994, Canadian journal of medical technology.

[6]  J. Sparano,et al.  TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx). , 2006, Clinical breast cancer.

[7]  Jack Cuzick,et al.  Prediction of risk of distant recurrence using the 21-gene recurrence score in node-negative and node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen: a TransATAC study. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  J. Zujewski,et al.  Trial assessing individualized options for treatment for breast cancer: the TAILORx trial. , 2008, Future oncology.

[9]  K. Schulman,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in the context of multifactorial decision making to guide chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[10]  N Mittmann,et al.  Economic guidelines for oncology products: Adaptation of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) technology assessment guidance document. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  Ariel Hammerman,et al.  Economic implications of 21-gene breast cancer risk assay from the perspective of an Israeli-managed health-care organization. , 2010, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[12]  S. Schraub,et al.  Epirubicin increases long-term survival in adjuvant chemotherapy of patients with poor-prognosis, node-positive, early breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of the French Adjuvant Study Group 05 randomized trial. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  J. Ross,et al.  MammaPrint™ 70-gene signature: another milestone in personalized medical care for breast cancer patients , 2009, Expert review of molecular diagnostics.

[14]  M. Zelen,et al.  Prolonged disease-free survival after one course of perioperative adjuvant chemotherapy for node-negative breast cancer. , 1989, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  P. Tartter,et al.  Does oncotype DX recurrence score affect the management of patients with early-stage breast cancer? , 2008, American journal of surgery.

[16]  Karen A Gelmon,et al.  Population-based validation of the prognostic model ADJUVANT! for early breast cancer. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  Robert B Livingston,et al.  Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. , 2010, The Lancet. Oncology.

[18]  T. Delozier,et al.  Sequential adjuvant epirubicin-based and docetaxel chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients: the FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  J. Hornberger,et al.  Impact of a 21‐gene RT‐PCR assay on treatment decisions in early‐stage breast cancer , 2007, Cancer.

[20]  F. Rojo,et al.  Prospective transGEICAM study of the impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay and traditional clinicopathological factors on adjuvant clinical decision making in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) node-negative breast cancer. , 2012, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[21]  Benefit of a high-dose epirubicin regimen in adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients with poor prognostic factors: 5-year follow-up results of French Adjuvant Study Group 05 randomized trial. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[22]  J. Cuzick,et al.  Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the Genomic Health recurrence score in early breast cancer. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[23]  A. Cohn,et al.  Impact of a commercial reference laboratory test recurrence score on decision making in early-stage breast cancer. , 2007, Journal of oncology practice.

[24]  M. Cronin,et al.  Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[25]  M. Cronin,et al.  A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[26]  D. Rayson,et al.  Primary G-CSF prophylaxis for adjuvant TC or FEC-D chemotherapy outside of clinical trial settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2012, Supportive Care in Cancer.

[27]  B. Jönsson,et al.  Health related quality of life in different states of breast cancer , 2007, Quality of Life Research.

[28]  F. Holmes,et al.  Docetaxel With Cyclophosphamide Is Associated With an Overall Survival Benefit Compared With Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide: 7-Year Follow-Up of US Oncology Research Trial 9735. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[29]  Jenny C. Chang,et al.  Survival of patients with metastatic breast carcinoma , 2003, Cancer.

[30]  Hiroshi Ishiguro,et al.  Economic evaluation of 21-gene reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay in lymph-node-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer in Japan , 2008, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[31]  J. Berthelot,et al.  Estimates of the lifetime costs of breast cancer treatment in Canada. , 2000, European journal of cancer.

[32]  Anna L. Brown,et al.  Two months of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide with and without interval reinduction therapy compared with 6 months of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in positive-node breast cancer patients with tamoxifen-nonresponsive tumors: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowe , 1990, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[33]  S. Swain,et al.  The influence of a Gene expression profile on breast cancer decisions , 2008, Journal of surgical oncology.

[34]  B. Hillner Impact of a 21-Gene RT-PCR Assay on Treatment Decisions in Early-Stage Breast Cancer , 2008 .

[35]  S. Verma,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of recurrence score-guided treatment using a 21-gene assay in early breast cancer. , 2010, The oncologist.

[36]  Hans Christian Pedersen,et al.  Mammostrat® as a tool to stratify breast cancer patients at risk of recurrence during endocrine therapy , 2010, Breast Cancer Research.

[37]  T. Yamanaka,et al.  Economic evaluation of the 21-gene signature (Oncotype DX®) in lymph node-negative/positive, hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer based on Japanese validation study (JBCRG-TR03) , 2011, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[38]  M. Espié,et al.  Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in premenopausal women with axillary node-positive operable breast cancer: results of a randomized trial. The International Collaborative Cancer Group. , 1996, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.