Search

Objective: Patients with recurrent endometrial cancer treated with carboplatin and paclitaxel whose disease progresses have few effective treatment options. Based on promising clinical trial data, the anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) antibody dostarlimab was recently granted accelerated approval for endometrial cancer by the US Food and Drug Administration. We developed a decision model to examine the cost-effectiveness of dostarlimab for patients with progressive/recurrent deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) endometrial cancer whose disease has progressed with first-line chemotherapy., Design: Cost-effectiveness study., Population: Hypothetical cohort of 6000 women with progressive/recurrent dMMR endometrial cancer., Methods: The initial decision point in the Markov model was treatment with dostarlimab, pembrolizumab or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD). Model probabilities, and cost and utility values were derived with assumptions drawn from published literature. Effectiveness was estimated as average quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to vary the assumptions across a range of plausible values., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)., Results: Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) was the least costly strategy, at $55,732, followed by dostarlimab ($151,533) and pembrolizumab ($154,597). Based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY, PLD was cost-effective compared with dostarlimab, with an ICER of $331,913 per QALY gained for dostarlimab, whereas pembrolizumab was ruled out by extended dominance (less effective, more costly), compared with dostarlimab. In one-way sensitivity analyses, dostarlimab was cost-effective when its cost was reduced to $4905 (52% reduction). These results were robust in a variety of sensitivity analyses., Conclusions: Dostarlimab is associated with greater survival compared with other treatments for women with recurrent dMMR endometrial cancer. Although the agent is substantially more costly, dostarlimab became cost-effective when its cost was reduced to $5489 per cycle., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: While there are a number of benefits to minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for women with ovarian cysts, there is an increased risk of ovarian capsule rupture during the procedure, which could potentially seed the abdominal cavity with malignant cells. We developed a decision model to compare the risks, benefits, effectiveness and cost of MIS versus laparotomy in women with ovarian masses., Design: Cost-effectiveness study POPULATION: Hypothetical cohort of 10 000 women with ovarian masses who were undergoing surgical management., Methods: The initial decision point in the model was performance of surgery via laparotomy or a MIS approach. Model probabilities, costs and utility values were derived from published literature and administrative data sources. Extensive sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the findings., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the cost-effectiveness of MIS versus laparotomy for women with a pelvic mass measured by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs)., Results: MIS was the least costly strategy at $7,732 per women on average, compared with $17,899 for laparotomy. In our hypothetical cohort of 10 000 women, there were 64 cases of ovarian rupture in the MIS group and 53 in the laparotomy group, while there were 26 cancer-related deaths in the MIS group and 25 in the laparotomy group. MIS was more effective than laparotomy (188 462 QALYs for MIS versus 187 631 quality adjusted life years [QALYs] for laparotomy). Thus, MIS was a dominant strategy, being both less costly and more effective than laparotomy. These results were robust in a variety of sensitivity analyses., Conclusion: MIS constitutes a cost-effective management strategy for women with suspicious ovarian masses., Tweetable Abstract: MIS is a cost-effective management strategy for women with suspicious ovarian masses., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)