[Health-economic aspects of radiotherapy]. / Aspects économiques de la radiothérapie.

Cancer care poses a significant economic burden, challenging healthcare budgets to balance patient benefits with affordability. Radiotherapy takes up only a limited part of oncology budgets, but the cost is rarely clear-cut due to influential factors such as complexity of treatments, highly-trained personnel and technologies. Health-economic appraisal is complex and can be performed in several ways, balancing costs and outcomes, but not all approaches are equally suitable for assessment of radiotherapy interventions. The concept of «value-based healthcare¼ offers a broader perspective to health-economic appraisal, considering various outcomes and the cost of the total cycle of care, thus addressing some of the challenges in radiotherapy: the diversity of interventions, a broad range of outcomes (including organ preservation or local control) and challenges in evidence generation. However, as the existing value-based frameworks in oncology are aimed at systemic therapies, a tailored approach for radiotherapy interventions is necessary to enhance access to innovative care and optimize resource allocation. This article explores the economic aspects of radiotherapy, providing an overview of radiotherapy cost determinants and calculations, discussing different health-economic strategies and value-based healthcare, and how these can address the specific challenges in radiotherapy.

Le coût économique du cancer représente un fardeau significatif, nécessitant un équilibre entre les bénéfices et la viabilité financière des budgets de santé. La radiothérapie ne représente qu'une part limitée des budgets d'oncologie, mais le coût est rarement clairement défini en raison, entre autres, de la complexité des traitements et du recours à un personnel hautement qualifié. L'évaluation est complexe et peut être réalisée de plusieurs manières, en équilibrant les coûts et les résultats, mais toutes les approches médico-économiques ne sont pas également adaptées à l'évaluation de la radiothérapie. Le concept de «value-based healthcare¼, qui prend en compte différents résultats et le coût du cycle total des soins, peut résoudre certains des défis de la radiothérapie : la diversité des interventions, un large éventail de résultats (comme le contrôle local) et les défis liés à la production de données probantes. Cependant, comme les cadres existants basés sur «value¼ en oncologie visent les thérapies systémiques, une approche adaptée à la radiothérapie est nécessaire pour améliorer l'accès aux soins innovants et optimiser l'allocation des ressources. Cet article explore les aspects économiques de la radiothérapie, en présentant les déterminants des coûts, ainsi qu'une discussion sur diverses stratégies et sur la manière dont elles peuvent répondre aux défis spécifiques de la radiothérapie.

Correction: Evaluating the health and health economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on delayed cancer care in Belgium: A Markov model study protocol.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288777.].

Evaluating the health and health economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on delayed cancer care in Belgium: A Markov model study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer causes a substantial burden to our society, both from a health and an economic perspective. To improve cancer patient outcomes and lower society expenses, early diagnosis and timely treatment are essential. The recent COVID-19 crisis has disrupted the care trajectory of cancer patients, which may affect their prognosis in a potentially negative way. The purpose of this paper is to present a flexible decision-analytic Markov model methodology allowing the evaluation of the impact of delayed cancer care caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium which can be used by researchers to respond to diverse research questions in a variety of disruptive events, contexts and settings. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was developed for 4 selected cancer types (i.e. breast, colorectal, lung, and head and neck), comparing the estimated costs and quality-adjusted life year losses between the pre-COVID-19 situation and the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium. Input parameters were derived from published studies (transition probabilities, utilities and indirect costs) and administrative databases (epidemiological data and direct medical costs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses are proposed to consider uncertainty in the input parameters and to assess the robustness of the model's results. Scenario analyses are suggested to evaluate methodological and structural assumptions. DISCUSSION: The results that such decision-analytic Markov model can provide are of interest to decision makers because they help them to effectively allocate resources to improve the health outcomes of cancer patients and to reduce the costs of care for both patients and healthcare systems. Our study provides insights into methodological aspects of conducting a health economic evaluation of cancer care and COVID-19 including insights on cancer type selection, the elaboration of a Markov model, data inputs and analysis.

A systematic literature review of definitions and classification systems for radiotherapy innovation: A first step towards building a value-based assessment tool for radiation oncology.

INTRODUCTION: Timely access to radiotherapy innovations remains suboptimal, partly because there is no commonly agreed appraisal system suitable for the broad range of radiotherapy interventions. The Health Economics in Radiation Oncology (HERO) programme of ESTRO therefore engaged in building a radiotherapy-specific value-based framework. We report on a first step towards that aim, documenting the available definitions and classification systems for radiotherapy interventions. METHODS: A systematic literature search was carried out in Pubmed and Embase, following PRISMA methodology and using search terms on 'innovation', 'radiotherapy', 'definition' and 'classification'. Data were extracted from articles that met prespecified inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Out of 13,353 articles, 25 met the inclusion criteria, resulting in the identification of 7 definitions of innovation and 15 classification systems applicable to radiation oncology. Iterative appraisal divided the classification systems into two groups. A first group of 11 systems categorized innovations according to the perceived magnitude of innovation, typically 'minor' versus 'major'. The remaining 4 systems categorised innovations according to radiotherapy-specific characteristics, such as the type of radiation equipment or radiobiological properties. Here, commonly used terms as 'technique' or 'treatment' were found to be used in different meanings. DISCUSSION: There is no widely accepted definition or classification system for radiotherapy innovations. The data however suggest that unique properties of radiotherapy interventions can be used to categorise innovations in radiation oncology. Still, there remains a need for clear terminology denoting radiotherapy-specific characteristics. CONCLUSION: Building on this review, the ESTRO-HERO project will define what is required for a radiotherapy-specific value-based assessment tool.