A microcosting study of microsurgery, LINAC radiosurgery, and gamma knife radiosurgery in meningioma patients.

The aim of the present study is to determine and compare initial treatment costs of microsurgery, linear accelerator (LINAC) radiosurgery, and gamma knife radiosurgery in meningioma patients. Additionally, the follow-up costs in the first year after initial treatment were assessed. Cost analyses were performed at two neurosurgical departments in The Netherlands from the healthcare providers' perspective. A total of 59 patients were included, of whom 18 underwent microsurgery, 15 underwent LINAC radiosurgery, and 26 underwent gamma knife radiosurgery. A standardized microcosting methodology was employed to ensure that the identified cost differences would reflect only actual cost differences. Initial treatment costs, using equipment costs per fraction, were 12,288 for microsurgery, 1,547 for LINAC radiosurgery, and 2,412 for gamma knife radiosurgery. Higher initial treatment costs for microsurgery were predominantly due to inpatient stay (5,321) and indirect costs (4,350). LINAC and gamma knife radiosurgery were equally expensive when equipment was valued per treatment (2,198 and 2,412, respectively). Follow-up costs were slightly, but not significantly, higher for microsurgery compared with LINAC and gamma knife radiosurgery. Even though initial treatment costs were over five times higher for microsurgery compared with both radiosurgical treatments, our study gives indications that the relative cost difference may decrease when follow-up costs occurring during the first year after initial treatment are incorporated. This reinforces the need to consider follow-up costs after initial treatment when examining the relative costs of alternative treatments.

Longitudinal changes in quality of life and costs in long-term survivors of tumors of the oropharynx treated with brachytherapy or surgery.

PURPOSE: Based on earlier studies we were interested in finding out if longitudinal assessment of quality of life (QoL) and costs in long-term survivors of oropharyngeal cancers treated with external beam radiation therapy and brachytherapy (BT) or surgery and postoperative radiotherapy showed a change in QoL over the years. Besides, we were curious to know how much the costs per life year and the QALY would be for this patient group. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Performance status scales: eating in public, understandability of speech, normalcy of diet, xerostomia and ability to swallow were determined in 2003 and 2005. In 2005, the responses to EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC H&N35, and the Euroqol questionnaire were also measured. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated. RESULTS: Eating in public, understandability of speech, and normalcy of diet significantly differed in favor of BT. Surgical patients experienced more speech, teeth, and mouth-opening problems. Mean costs and QALYs for BT were 16,112 euros and 56,060 euros and for surgery 26,590 euros and 93,275 euros, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: QoL scores don't change over time. Due to the number of admission days, surgery is more costly. Difference in costs for QALYs in favor of BT was observed.

Interstitial radiation therapy for early-stage nasal vestibule cancer: a continuing quest for optimal tumor control and cosmesis.

INTRODUCTION: This article reports on the effectiveness, cosmetic outcome, and costs of interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy for early-stage cancer of the nasal vestibule (NV) proper and/or columella high-dose-rate (HDR). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Tumor control, survival, cosmetic outcome, functional results, and costs were established in 64 T1/T2N0 nasal vestibule cancers treated from 1991-2005 by fractionated interstitial radiation therapy (IRT) only. Total dose is 44 Gy: 2 fractions of 3 Gy per day, 6-hour interval, first and last fraction 4 Gy. Cosmesis is noted in the chart by the medical doctor during follow-up, by the patient (visual analog scale), and by a panel. Finally, full hospital costs are computed. RESULTS: A local relapse-free survival rate of 92% at 5 years was obtained. Four local failures were observed; all four patients were salvaged. The neck was not treated electively; no neck recurrence in follow-up was seen. Excellent cosmetic and functional results were observed. With 10 days admission for full treatment, hospital costs amounted to euro5772 (7044 US dollars). CONCLUSION: Excellent tumor control, cosmesis, and function of nasal airway passage can be achieved when HDR-IRT for T1/T2N0 NV cancers is used. For the more advanced cancers (Wang classification: T3 tumor stage), we elect to treat by local excision followed by a reconstructive procedure. The costs, admission to hospital inclusive, for treatment by HDR-IRT amounts to euro5772 (7044 US dollars). This contrasts substantially with the full hospital costs when NV cancers are treated by plastic reconstructive surgery, being on average threefold as expensive.

Cancer in the oropharynx: cost calculation of different treatment modalities for controlled primaries, relapses and grade III/IV complications.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This paper presents a model for cost calculation using the different treatment modalities for oropharyngeal (OPh) cancers used in our hospital. We compared full hospital costs, the associated costs of localregional relapses (LRR) and/or treatment related grade III/IV complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with OPh cancer are treated in the Erasmus MC preferably by an organ function preservation protocol. That is, by external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) followed by a brachytherapy (BT) boost, and neck dissection in case of N+ disease (BT-group: 157 patients). If BT is not feasible, resection with postoperative EBRT (S-group [S=Surgery]: 110 patients) or EBRT-alone (EBRT-group: 77 patients) is being pursued. Actuarial localregional control (LRC), disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) at 5-years were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. The mean costs per treatment group for diagnosis, primary Tx per se, follow-up, (salvage of) locoregional relapse (LRR), distant metastasis (DM), and/or grade III/IV complications needing clinical admission, were computed. RESULTS: For the BT-, S-, or EBRT treatment groups, LRC rates at 5-years were 85, 82, and 55%, for the DFS, 61, 48, and 43%, and for the OS 65, 52, and 40%, respectively. The mean costs of primary Tx in case of the BT-group is 13,466; for the S-group 24,219, and 12,502 for the EBRT-group. The mean costs of S (the main salvage modality) for a LRR of the BT group or EBRT-group, were 17,861 and 15,887, respectively. The mean costs of clinical management of Grade III/IV complications were 7184 (BT-group), 16,675 (S-group) and 6437 (EBRT-group). CONCLUSION: The clinical outcome illustrates excellent LRC rates at 5-years for BT (85%), as well as for S (82%). The relatively low 55% LRC rate at 5-years for EBRT probably reflects a negative selection of patients. It is of interest that the total mean costs of patients alive with no evidence of disease is least for the BT-group: 15,101 as opposed to 25,288 (S) and 18,674 (EBRT). Main underlying cause for the high costs with S as opposed to RT alone is the number of associated clinical admission days, not only during primary treatment, but also at relapse. This might be taken into consideration when treating these patients.

Costs of treatment intensification for head and neck cancer: concomitant chemoradiation randomised for radioprotection with amifostine.

This study presents an overview of costs of a chemoradiation protocol in head and neck cancer patients and an analysis of whether prevention of acute toxicity with amifostine results in a reduction to costs. Fifty-four patients treated with weekly paclitaxel concomitant with radiation were randomised for treatment with subcutaneously administered amifostine (500 mg) and analysed with respect to costs of treatment. Total costs for work-up, treatment and toxicity were calculated per treatment arm. No significant differences were found between treatment arms in preliminary results regarding response (98%), toxicity and 2-year survival (77%). Average costs for toxicity were Euro 3.789, largely influenced by hospital admissions (Euro 3.013). Total costs for amifostine administration amounted to Euro 6.495 per patient. The average total costs of treatment were Euro 19.647 versus Euro 13.592 with or without amifostine, respectively. The applied (subcutaneous) dose of amifostine appeared to be insufficient for radioprotection and reduction of related costs in the concomitant chemoradiation scheme, whereas total costs increased remarkably. Although it would be accompanied by a further cost raise, applying a higher amifostine dose might reduce (mucosal) toxicity and therefore in the long run lower related costs for hospital admission and tube feeding.

Radical radiotherapy compared with surgery for advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the base of tongue.

PURPOSE: This study reports on T3/T4 base of tongue (BOT) tumors treated at the Erasmus MC (Rotterdam) with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BT). Local control, survival, and functional outcome are compared to results obtained in similar patients treated at the Vrije University Medical Center (VUMC, Amsterdam) by surgery and postoperative RT (PORT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: At Rotterdam 46/2 Gy was given to the primary and bilateral neck, followed by an implant using low-dose-rate (LDR 24-35 Gy; median 27 Gy), or fractionated high-dose-rate (fr. HDR 20-28 Gy; median 24 Gy). A neck dissection (ND) was performed in case of N+ disease. 67% of BOT tumors had a T4 cancer. At Amsterdam surgery (S) followed by PORT 40-70 Gy (median 60 Gy) was performed; 26% BOT tumors were T4. Sex, age and nodal distribution were similar. Actuarial local control and survival were computed. Performance Status Scale (PSS) scores were established. Xerostomis was determined on visual analog scales (VAS). RESULTS: Local failure at 5-years was 37% (Rotterdam) vs. 9% (Amsterdam) (p < 0.01). The overall survival was not significantly different (median 2.5 years vs. 2.9 years, respectively [p = 0.47]). The PSS favored brachytherapy. Both groups were equally affected by xerostomia. CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year local control was 65% with EBRT and BT. This result is strongly affected by 4 patients with residual disease after implantation. The Rotterdam patients had more advanced BOT tumors (67% vs. 26% T4), explaining the higher local failure rate. Given the organ preservation properties of radiotherapy-only and the better PSS scores, the jury is still out on the optimal treatment for BOT tumors.

Brachytherapy versus surgery in carcinoma of tonsillar fossa and/or soft palate: late adverse sequelae and performance status: can we be more selective and obtain better tissue sparing?

PURPOSE: To report on the tumor control, adverse late normal tissue sequelae, and functional performance in patients with tonsillar fossa and/or soft palate (SP) tumors. The aim of the study is to validate the use of a more selective clinical target volume in conjunction with highly conformal radiotherapy (RT) techniques to better spare the surrounding normal tissues. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1986 and 2001, T1-T3 tonsillar fossa/SP tumors were treated in the Erasmus Medical Center using external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) to 46 Gy in 2-Gy fractions to the primary tumor and neck, followed by brachytherapy (BT) to the primary. Neck dissection was performed for node-positive disease (BT group; 104 patients). If BT was not feasible, patients underwent surgery and postoperative RT (PORT) to a dose of 50-70 Gy in 2-Gy fractions (surgery group; 86 patients). Local control, regional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival were determined. Late side effects were scored using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed for regional failure (RF), with the parameters gender, age, site, TN stage, modality, dose, and overall treatment time. Recurrences in the contralateral neck were also related to significant ipsilateral involvement of the base of tongue and/or involvement of the SP crossing the midline. To determine the performance status scale scores and degree of xerostomia, a survey was conducted among patients living with no evidence of disease and a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. For that purpose, a research nurse interviewed patients regarding eating in public, normalcy of diet, normalcy of speech, and xerostomia. RESULTS: The tumor control rates after BT vs. surgery at 5 years were 88% vs. 88% for local control; 93% vs. 85% for regional control; 57% vs. 52% for disease-free survival; 67% vs. 57% for overall survival; and 5% vs. 6% for RF. No patient had RF in the contralateral untreated N0 neck (0 of 14 vs. 0 of 15). Multivariate Cox regression analysis for RF was statistically significant for Stage T2 vs. T3 (hazard ratio 0.09) and for the dose to the neck >46 Gy (hazard ratio, 8.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-57.1). The significant late side effects in the BT group vs. surgery group were ulcer in 39% vs. 7% (p = 0.001) and trismus in 1% vs. 21% (p = 0.005). The performance status scale scores and response to questions regarding xerostomia for BT vs. surgery revealed no statistically significant differences for eating in public, normalcy of diet, normalcy of speech, and xerostomia. The mean visual analog score for xerostomia was 5.5 in the BT group vs. 6 in the surgery group. CONCLUSION: Excellent locoregional control was obtained in T1-T3 tonsillar fossa and/or SP tumors. The rate at 10 years was 84% (BT group) vs. 78% (surgery group). However, adverse late side effects were not negligible. In addition to modality-specific side effects (ulcer/trismus), both treatment groups were significantly affected by xerostomia. Only 6 recurrences (4%) were observed in the 149 electively treated contralateral necks, and no relapses were seen in the 29 untreated contralateral necks. We, therefore, suggest that it is not necessary to treat the contralateral neck, unless the tumor extends beyond the midline of the soft palate (uvula) or beyond the lateral one-third of the ipsilateral base of the tongue. Moreover, with the currently available CT-based neck level definitions, more conformal contours (i.e., tighter boundaries) around the clinical target volume can be designed. In this way, critical structures such as the temporomandibular joint and part of the pterygoid muscles can be avoided more easily. Also, when using highly conformal treatment techniques (e.g., intensity-modulated RT), one can further reduce the dose to the major salivary glands and oral mucosa. We believe these measures will lead to less trismus and less xerostomia.

Cost analysis comparing brachytherapy versus surgery for primary carcinoma of the tonsillar fossa and/or soft palate.

PURPOSE: Locoregional control rates, late normal tissue sequelae, and functional outcome scores have not been different for tonsillar fossa and/or soft palate tumors treated by either brachytherapy (BT) or surgery in an organ function preservation protocol. For additional prioritizing in clinical decision-making, we focused on a comparison of the full hospital costs of the different treatment options. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1986 and 2001, tonsillar fossa and/or soft palate tumors were treated by external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) to the primary tumor and neck, followed by fractionated BT to the primary. Neck dissection (ND) was performed for node-positive disease (BT group; 104 patients). If BT was not feasible, resection combined with postoperative EBRT was executed (surgery group; 86 patients). Locoregional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. The performance status scales, late side effects, and degree of xerostomia have been previously reported. This paper focused on the hospital and follow-up costs for the treatment groups EBRT and BT with or without ND compared with surgery followed by postoperative RT (PORT). Finally, these costs were also computed for future treatment strategies (e.g., better sparing of normal tissues by intensity-modulated RT [IMRT]). RESULTS: Locoregional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival rate at 5 years for patients treated with EBRT and BT with or without ND vs. surgery plus PORT was 80% vs. 78%, 58% vs. 55%, and 67% vs. 57%, respectively. The major late side effect was xerostomia. Dry mouth syndrome affected the BT group and surgery group equally. The total costs for all treatment groups were 14,262 euro (BT group), 16,628 euro (BT plus ND group), 18,782 euro (surgery plus PORT group), 14,532 euro (IMRT group), and 16,897 euro (IMRT plus ND group). CONCLUSION: Excellent locoregional tumor control was observed with either modality, with no statistically significant differences in the incidence of the most noted side effect xerostomia. The total costs for BT were less than for surgery: 16,628 euro (19,452 dollars) for EBRT plus BT plus ND vs. 18,782 euro(22,074 dollars) for surgery plus PORT. To reduce the morbidity of xerostomia, we propose further optimizing our organ function preservation protocol by implementing IMRT as a more conformal, tissue-sparing, RT technique. This is of particular interest because the costs of IMRT plus ND (16,897 euro; 19,767 dollars) were not very different from those for BT plus ND (16,628 euro; 19,452 dollars) and were far less than the costs for surgery.

Chemotherapy and high-dose-rate brachytherapy in the management of advanced cancers of the nasopharynx: clinical impact of high technology--is it worth the cost?

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to calculate the costs of chemotherapy and high-dose-rate brachytherapy in advanced-stage nasopharyngeal cancer. It is argued whether the effect of chemotherapy and this type of high-dose, high-precision radiation therapy is worth the costs. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Clinical results of Stage III-IVB nasopharyngeal cancer in patients treated between 1991 and 2000 are reported. Treatment was broken down into five categories: workup, chemotherapy, preparation of radiation therapy, and application of radiation. For each category, costs were computed. Nasopharyngeal cancer treatment costs were compared with costs previously reported on patients treated for cancers of the oral cavity, larynx, and oropharynx. RESULTS: With the addition of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and high cumulative doses of radiation (77-81 Gy) with brachytherapy, disease-free survival increased from 48% to 74% (p=0.002), and overall survival increased from 35% to 72% (p=0.005). The Rotterdam protocol has been implemented stepwise: as of 1991, costs per patient increased from 4521 Euros (US$5023; 2001 exchange rate [December]: 1 Euro approximately 0.88 US$) for conventional external beam radiation therapy to 13,728 Euros (US$15,253) in 2000 for combinations of chemotherapy, conventional external beam radiation therapy, and brachytherapy. In case of stereotactic radiotherapy, the cost was 14,516 Euros (US$16,495). CONCLUSIONS: Costs for cancer in the nasopharynx vary from 14,528 Euros (US$16,509) to 15,316 Euros (US$17,405) in case of brachytherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy, respectively, if follow-up costs are added. The treatment cost for other head and neck sites was 21,858 Euros (US$24,126). Given the improvement in survival, the sparing capabilities of current high-dose, high-precision radiotherapy techniques, and the favorable cost profile compared with other sites, it is argued that costs should not be considered prohibitive for the introduction of chemotherapy and high-technology-based radiotherapy in advanced nasopharyngeal cancer.