|
|
Hepatocellular and renal cell carcinoma treatment strategies: a review of health economic analyses
| Third-party funded project |
| Project title |
Hepatocellular and renal cell carcinoma treatment strategies: a review of health economic analyses |
| Principal Investigator(s) |
Blank, Patricia R.
|
| Co-Investigator(s) |
Szucs, Thomas
|
| Organisation / Research unit |
Departement Public Health / Pharmazeutische Medizin ECPM |
| Project start |
01.08.2011 |
| Probable end |
31.07.2012 |
| Status |
Completed |
| Abstract |
Background: Advances in the development of medicines, interventional radiology, and surgical techniques have led to substantial benefits for prognosis and management of hepatocellular (HCC) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients, but also increased health care costs. Reliable evidence of health economic data of available treatment strategies give raise to costs and benefits of medical interventions. Methods: A systematic review of evidence was conducted for cost-consequence and cost-effectiveness studies published up to August 2011 in PubMed, ISI Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Evidence was appraised by systematically evaluating study components defined in the BMJ Guideline for economic submissions. Characteristics of the studies were catalogued along with major characteristics of a reliable health economics study. The present work included the description of all studies that met the inclusion criteria. Results: Eight studies of local, locoregional, surgical and systemic therapies for HCC and RCC patient management were included and critically appraised. Treatment strategies included percutaneous ethanol injection, radiofrequency ablation, transarterial chemoembolization, sorafenib or orthotopic liver transplantation for HCC and nephroctomy, cryoablation, or medical therapies (sorafenib, sumitinib, bevacicumab) for RCC, respectively. Four publications originated from the US and the remainder from Europe. Only 50% of the studies determined both costs and effects (in terms of life year gained, complete response or quality adjusted life years) of therapeutic interventions. Systemic therapy was only covered by one analysis each for HCC and RCC, respectively. Given different study endpoints, it was not possible to make a comparison within treatment approaches. Comprehensive cost-effectiveness analyses of various HCC and RCC therapies are still warranted. Conclusion: The present review of evidence for a cross section of recently published economic studies indicates that there is a great opportunity to improve the quality and complexity of cost- and cost-effectiveness studies. By using state-of-the-art health economic methodology, one would be able at dealing in part with the existing lack of data. |
| Financed by |
Private Sector / Industry
|
| |
|
|
MCSS v5.8 PRO. 0.486 sec, queries - 0.000 sec
©Universität Basel | Impressum
|  |
|
15/05/2024
Research Database / FORSCHUNGSDATENBANK
|
