Cost-Effectiveness Models of Proton Therapy for Head and Neck: Evaluating Quality and Methods to Date

Purpose Proton beam therapy (PBT) is associated with less toxicity relative to conventional photon radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer (HNC). Upfront delivery costs are greater, but PBT can provide superior long-term value by minimizing treatment-related complications. Cost-effectiveness models (CEMs) estimate the relative value of novel technologies (such as PBT) as compared with the established standard of care. However, the uncertainties of CEMs can limit interpretation and applicability. This review serves to (1) assess the methodology and quality of pertinent CEMs in the existing literature, (2) evaluate their suitability for guiding clinical and economic strategies, and (3) discuss areas for improvement among future analyses. Materials and Methods PubMed was queried for CEMs specific to PBT for HNC. General characteristics, modeling information, and methodological approaches were extracted for each identified study. Reporting quality was assessed via the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 24-item checklist, whereas methodologic quality was evaluated via the Philips checklist. The Cooper evidence hierarchy scale was employed to analyze parameter inputs referenced within each model. Results At the time of study, only 4 formal CEMs specific to PBT for HNC had been published (2005, 2013, 2018, 2020). The parameter inputs among these various Markov cohort models generally referenced older literature, excluding many clinically relevant complications and applying numerous hypothetical assumptions for toxicity states, incorporating inputs from theoretical complication-probability models because of limited availability of direct clinical evidence. Case numbers among study cohorts were low, and the structural design of some models inadequately reflected the natural history of HNC. Furthermore, cost inputs were incomplete and referenced historic figures. Conclusion Contemporary CEMs are needed to incorporate modern estimates for toxicity risks and costs associated with PBT delivery, to provide a more accurate estimate of value, and to improve their clinical applicability with respect to PBT for HNC.

[1]  Jing Jiang,et al.  Adoption of Radiation Technology Among Privately Insured Nonelderly Patients With Cancer in the United States, 2008 to 2014: A Claims-Based Analysis. , 2017, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[2]  Mickaël Hiligsmann,et al.  How to prepare a systematic review of economic evaluations for informing evidence-based healthcare decisions: a five-step approach (part 1/3) , 2016, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[3]  T. Bortfeld,et al.  Proton therapy: clinical gains through current and future treatment programs. , 2011, Frontiers of radiation therapy and oncology.

[4]  V. Verma,et al.  National practice patterns of proton versus photon therapy in the treatment of adult patients with primary brain tumors in the United States , 2018, Acta oncologica.

[5]  E. Crawford,et al.  Patient characterization and usage trends of proton beam therapy for localized prostate cancer in the United States: A study of the National Cancer Database. , 2017, Urologic oncology.

[6]  D. Gomez,et al.  Cost Analysis of PET/CT Versus CT as Surveillance for Stage III Non–Small‐Cell Lung Cancer After Definitive Radiation Therapy , 2018, Clinical lung cancer.

[7]  W. Crown,et al.  Photon and Proton Radiation Therapy Utilization in a Population of More Than 100 Million Commercially Insured Patients. , 2015, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  Atif J. Khan,et al.  Outcomes and patterns of care in a nationwide cohort of pediatric medulloblastoma: Factors affecting proton therapy utilization , 2017, Advances in radiation oncology.

[9]  P. Catalano,et al.  Incidence and Demographic Burden of HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Head and Neck Cancers in the United States , 2019, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[10]  A. Garden,et al.  Comparing Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy With Intensity-Modulated Photon Therapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer: The Journey From Clinical Trial Concept to Activation. , 2018, Seminars in radiation oncology.

[11]  Marco Durante,et al.  Charged particle therapy—optimization, challenges and future directions , 2013, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

[12]  Jeffrey L. Anderson,et al.  Comparative analysis of acute toxicities and patient reported outcomes between intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer. , 2020, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[13]  K. Hoffman,et al.  National trends and determinants of proton therapy use for prostate cancer: A National Cancer Data Base study , 2016, Cancer.

[14]  Fares Alahdab,et al.  Charged particle therapy versus photon therapy for paranasal sinus and nasal cavity malignant diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2014, The Lancet. Oncology.

[15]  L. Rozek,et al.  Increasing prevalence of HPV in oropharyngeal carcinoma suggests adaptation of p16 screening in Southeast Asia. , 2020, Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology.

[16]  Mark W. McDonald,et al.  Acute toxicity in comprehensive head and neck radiation for nasopharynx and paranasal sinus cancers: cohort comparison of 3D conformal proton therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy , 2016, Radiation Oncology.

[17]  M. Cowie National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. , 2015, European heart journal.

[18]  M. Drummond,et al.  Incorporating economics evidence , 2008 .

[19]  J. Metz,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness of Proton vs Photon Therapy as Part of Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Cancer. , 2019, JAMA oncology.

[20]  P. Bondiau,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of proton beam therapy for treatment decision making in paranasal sinus and nasal cavity cancers in China , 2020, BMC Cancer.

[21]  Steven J Frank,et al.  Intensity-modulated proton beam therapy (IMPT) versus intensity-modulated photon therapy (IMRT) for patients with oropharynx cancer - A case matched analysis. , 2016, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[22]  RobertI Miller,et al.  Proton beam therapy utilization in adults with primary brain tumors in the United States , 2020, Journal of Clinical Neuroscience.

[23]  David Moher,et al.  Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement , 2013, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[24]  J. Langendijk,et al.  A Model-Based Approach to Predict Short-Term Toxicity Benefits With Proton Therapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer. , 2019, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[25]  M Goitein,et al.  The relative costs of proton and X-ray radiation therapy. , 2003, Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)).

[26]  K. Hunt,et al.  Trends in Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy Use and Impact on Rates of Breast Conservation in Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: A National Cancer Data Base Study , 2017, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[27]  N. Lee,et al.  Outcomes and toxicities of definitive radiotherapy and reirradiation using 3‐dimensional conformal or intensity‐modulated (pencil beam) proton therapy for patients with nasal cavity and paranasal sinus malignancies , 2020, Cancer.

[28]  Bengt Jönsson,et al.  Proton therapy of cancer: Potential clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness , 2005, Acta oncologica.

[29]  Aashish K Shah,et al.  Three-Year Results of a Prospective Statewide Insurance Coverage Pilot for Proton Therapy: Stakeholder Collaboration Improves Patient Access to Care. , 2020, JCO oncology practice.

[30]  Keith Abrams,et al.  Use of evidence in decision models: an appraisal of health technology assessments in the UK since 1997 , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[31]  A. Gray,et al.  A systematic review of health economic evaluations of proton beam therapy for adult cancer: Appraising methodology and quality , 2019, Clinical and translational radiation oncology.

[32]  S. Kalnicki,et al.  A Quantitative Clinical Decision-Support Strategy Identifying Which Patients With Oropharyngeal Head and Neck Cancer May Benefit the Most From Proton Radiation Therapy. , 2019, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[33]  Steven J Frank,et al.  Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy ( IMPT ) versus Intensity-Modulated Photon Radiotherapy ( IMRT ) for Oropharyngeal Cancer : First Comparative Results of Patient-Reported Outcomes , 2016 .

[34]  C. Deville,et al.  Sociodemographic disparities in the utilization of proton therapy for prostate cancer at an urban academic center , 2017, Advances in radiation oncology.

[35]  S. Evers,et al.  How to prepare a systematic review of economic evaluations for informing evidence-based healthcare decisions: data extraction, risk of bias, and transferability (part 3/3) , 2016, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[36]  Hanne M Kooy,et al.  Shortening delivery times of intensity modulated proton therapy by reducing proton energy layers during treatment plan optimization. , 2015, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[37]  Aashish K Shah,et al.  The Insurance Approval Process for Proton Radiation Therapy: A Significant Barrier to Patient Care. , 2019, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[38]  S. Golder,et al.  Good Practice Guidelines for Decision-Analytic Modelling in Health Technology Assessment , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[39]  T. Trikalinos,et al.  Recommendations for Conduct, Methodological Practices, and Reporting of Cost-effectiveness Analyses: Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 2016, JAMA.

[40]  D. Mansur Incorporating a compact proton therapy unit into an existing National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center , 2014, Expert review of anticancer therapy.

[41]  J. Higgins,et al.  Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[42]  Katia Parodi,et al.  Can Technological Improvements Reduce the Cost of Proton Radiation Therapy? , 2018, Seminars in radiation oncology.

[43]  J. Kleijnen,et al.  How to prepare a systematic review of economic evaluations for clinical practice guidelines: database selection and search strategy development (part 2/3) , 2016, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[44]  S. Giordano,et al.  Financial Burdens of Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review of Risk Factors and Outcomes. , 2019, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[45]  Steven J Frank,et al.  Strategic Operational Redesign for Successfully Navigating Prior Authorization Barriers at a Large-Volume Proton Therapy Center. , 2020, JCO oncology practice.

[46]  Nhat-Long Pham,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus Proton Therapy for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. , 2018, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[47]  Johannes A Langendijk,et al.  Protons in head-and-neck cancer: bridging the gap of evidence. , 2013, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.