Cost-effectiveness of hypofractionated versus conventional radiotherapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer: An ancillary study of the PROstate fractionated irradiation trial – PROFIT

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

PurposeTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of moderate Hypofractionated Radiotherapy (H-RT) compared to Conventional Radiotherapy (C-RT) for intermediate-risk prostate caner (PCa). MethodsA prospective randomized clinical trial including 222 patients from six French cancer centers was conducted as an ancillary study of the international PROstate Fractionated Irradiation Trial (PROFIT). We carried-out a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) from the payer’s perspective, with a time horizon of 48 months.Patients assigned to the H-RT arm received 6000 cGy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks, or 7800 cGy in 39 fractions over 7 to 8 weeks in the C-RT arm. Patients completed quality of life (QoL) questionnaire: Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) at baseline, 24 and 48 months, which were mapped to obtain a EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D) equivalent to generate Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY).We assessed differences in QALYs and costs between the two arms with Generalized Linear Models (GLMs). Costs, estimated in euro (€) 2020, were combined with QALYs to estimate the Incremental Cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with non-parametric bootstrap. ResultsTotal costs per patien were lower in the H-RT arm compared to the C-RT arm €3,062 (95 % CI: 2,368 to 3,754) versus €4,285 (95 % CI: 3,355 to 5,215), (p < 0.05). QALY were marginally higher in the H-RT arm, however this difference was not significant: 0.044 (95 % CI: − 0.016 to 0.099). ConclusionsTreating localized prostate cancer with moderate H-RT could reduce national health insurance spending. Adopting such a treatment with an updated reimbursement tariff would result in improving resource allocation in RT management.