Search

To perform a cost-utility analysis utilizing a cooperative group protocol and constrasting the results with the published quality adjusted survival.A cost-utility analysis was performed on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) protocol 83-02. The quality-adjusted survival has been published previously. Pretreatment tests and chemotherapy costs are not considered, as these were similar across all treatment arms. Payor costs are calculated from Federal Register data for Medicare Region IV. Global charges are used to calculate the professional and technical charges. Costs are measured in relative value units (RVUs) and are tabulated assuming equal treatment complexity for all treatment arms.The number of RVUs calculated for each arm were 48 Gy--166.65; 54.4 Gy--182.17; 64.8 Gy--232.53; 72.0 Gy--272.19; 76.8 Gy--287.11; and 81.6 Gy--302.63. The RVU/QALY for the50-year-old group were 48 Gy--119.03; 54.4 Gy--100.65; 64.8 Gy--104.78; 72.0 Gy--90.73; 76.8 Gy--193.99; and 81.6 Gy--165.37. The RVU/QALY for the50-year-old group were 48 Gy--198.39; 54.4 Gy--276.85; 64.8 Gy--426.57; 72.0 Gy--423.71; 76.8 Gy--703.70; and 81.6 Gy--519.10. Sensitivity analysis of one treatment plan, simulation, and set of blocks for the 48 Gy and 54.4 Gy arms decreased the RVU/QALY to 105.34 and 90.05, respectively.Our analyses shows the experimental arm with the lowest RVU/QALY is also the arm with the longest quality-adjusted survival. This arm had the most efficient use of resources in this protocol. Prospective collection of all pertinent cost data is required for comparison of one treatment against another. All cooperative group protocols should have prospective quality of life and economic endpoints to allow for comparison of the most cost efficient treatment method.

Purpose: To quantify the quality of life of malignant glioma patients treated on a randomized Phase I/II trial of twice-daily radiation therapy (RT) and carmustine, using a modified quality adjusted survival (QAS) model, and to compare the QAS among assigned treatment arms. Materials and Methods: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) accrued 786 malignant glioma patients to a Phase I/II randomized dose escalation trial of twice-daily RT with carmustine from 1983 to 1989. Patients were randomized to one of four arms of hyperfractionated RT in 1.2 Gy twice daily (BID) fractions (64.8 Gy, 72.0 Gy, 76.8 Gy, or 81.6 Gy) or to either of two accelerated hyperfractionated RT arms in 1.6 Gy BID fractions (48.0 or 54.4 Gy). Although preliminary toxicity and survival data have been published, little information is available regarding the quality of these patients' lives during and following such therapy. QAS is a refinement of the methodology for assessing survival quality among breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. The QAS method allows for inclusion of both improvement and decline in neurologic functional status. Patients were scored by the presence or absence of 15 neurologic signs and symptoms at on-study and at every follow-up. Within each category were gradations of severity, with the quality survival time (Q-TIME) adjusted according to any changes in these neurologic findings. The summation of all changes in signs and symptoms were weighted by 1/15th and incorporated into the QAS model as QAS=Q-TIME-TOX-RRX. TOX was the time spent with treatment-related toxicities, and RRX was the time spent in recovery from subsequent therapy. Results: Of 747 evaluable patients, the average QAS time was 18.5 months. The average QAS for the hyperfractionated arms of 64.8 Gy, 72.0 Gy, 76.8 Gy, and 81.6 Gy were 15.6, 20.8, 10.0, and 13.7 months, respectively. For the accelerated hyperfractionated RT arms of 48.0 and 54.4 Gy, the average QAS times were 13.1 and 13.4 months. The QAS time of the 72.0 Gy arm was significantly longer than that of all other groups, except the 64.8 Gy arm. As expected, the QAS times were strongly discriminated by both age and Karnofsky Performance Scores (KPS) (p