The financial impact of fractionation scheme and treatment planning method for rectal cancer in the United States.

Abstract

6518 Background: Preoperative long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and short-course radiotherapy (SCR) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) were found to have equivalent outcomes in three randomized trials. SCR may have lower acute toxicity and the down-staging following CRT is more well-established. At present, SCR is frequently used in Europe but has not been widely adopted in the United States (US). It is standard to deliver radiotherapy by 3D planning, while the use of Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is controversial. In recent years there has been an increasing focus on understanding the cost and value of cancer care. In this study we aimed to assess the economic impact of fractionation scheme and treatment planning method for payers in the US. Methods: We performed a population-based analysis of the total cost of radiotherapy for LARC in the US annually. The national annual target population of patients was calculated using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Treatment costs for various fractionation schemes were based on billing codes and 2018 pricing by Medicare's Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS). The cost of chemotherapy was based on the Payment Allowance Limits for Medicare Part B Drugs by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Results: We estimate that 12,945 patients with LARC are treated with radiotherapy annually in the US. The cost of CRT with 3-D or IMRT is US$ 15,881.76 and US$ 23,744.82 per patient, respectively. With 3-D SCR the cost is US$ 5,457 per patient. The use of SCR would lead to 64-77% annual savings of US$ 125,701,387 - US$ 236,727,934 in the US compared with 3-D and IMRT based CRT, respectively. IMRT based planning increases the total cost of CRT by 49% and if adopted widely would lead to an excess cost of US$ 101,787,312 annually. Conclusions: SCR may have the potential to save in the region of US$ 0.12-0.23 billion annually in the US, likely without impacting outcomes. Lack of evidence showing benefit with costly IMRT should limit its use to clinical trials. SCR may also lead to lower personal financial toxicity. It would be reasonable for public and private payers to consider which type of radiation is most suited to reimbursement.