Longitudinal Costs of Image-Guided Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiation: Lessons From Phase III PARCER Trial for Shaping Resource-Stratified Guidelines in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Abstract

The PARCER trial provided level I evidence for image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IG-IMRT) in patients with cervical cancer. Further information regarding long-term financial impact is imperative for adoption into the National Cancer Grid of India cervical cancer resource-stratified guidelines. Patient data from the PARCER trial were analyzed to evaluate the cost implications of transitioning to IG-IMRT. Lacking differences in outcomes between the three-dimensional conformal radiation (3D-CRT) and IG-IMRT, differences in treatment costs, adverse event incidence, and toxicity management costs were examined. The overall financial impact was estimated by adding the treatment costs, toxicity management, and wage loss. This was extrapolated nationally to determine if a transition to IG-IMRT would be feasible for the Indian health care system. Of the 300 patients in the PARCER trial, 93 faced grades ≥2 adverse events (3D-CRT = 59, IG-IMRT = 34). Patients in the 3D-CRT and IG-IMRT arms spent an average of 2.39 years and 1.96 years in toxicity, respectively. The average toxicity management and the yearly financial impact per patient were, respectively, 1.50 and 1.44 times higher for 3D-CRT patients compared with IG-IMRT patients. Extrapolation to the national level showed that treatment with 3D-CRT led to a 2.88 times higher cost ratio when compared with treatment with IG-IMRT. Although the initial costs of IG-IMRT are high, on the basis of longitudinal data, it is financially inefficient to treat with 3D-CRT. Resource-stratified guidelines should include longitudinal health intervention costs rather than solely initial costs for policy decisions to implement advanced radiation technology.