Thao, Viengneesee

AbstractBackgroundThe Merlin assay for melanoma‐risk assessment has become commercially available to reduce the rate of unnecessary sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) in SLNB‐eligible patients with cutaneous melanoma. Merlin low‐risk patients are recommended to undergo wide local excision (WLE) of the primary tumor, whereas Merlin high‐risk patients are recommended to undergo both SLNB and WLE. Here, we compared the cost of a Merlin testing strategy to that of a no‐testing strategy (usual care) before prescribing SLNB.MethodsWe identified T1 and T2 patients who underwent WLE and SLNB but not completion lymph node dissection between 2007 and 2018. Controls were T1 patients who only underwent WLE. Costs for WLE and SLNB were calculated by converting institutional cost data to standardized Medicare reimbursement rates. We then developed a decision tree to compare the cost of Merlin testing to that of a no‐testing strategy (usual care).ResultsThe average standardized cost of WLE was $2066, whereas the cost of WLE and SLNB was $11,976 based on Medicare rates. At a cost below $7350 for T1b melanoma and $4600 for T1b to T2 melanoma, Merlin testing was cost‐saving compared to a no‐testing strategy (usual care), assuming Medicare reimbursement rates.ConclusionMerlin testing for T1b and T2 melanoma is potentially cost saving depending on the cost of the molecular assay and SLNB reimbursement rates. In addition to being cost saving, Merlin is expected to improve health‐related quality of life.

Objectives Pancreas transplant is the only treatment that establishes normal glucose levels for patients diagnosed with diabetes. We analyzed the outcome of pancreas transplant alone (PTA) versus standard of care in the United States from 2008 to 2018. We also developed an economic model to analyze the cost-effectiveness of pancreas transplant versus continuing standard of care. Methods We used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database and analyzed PTA recipient survival. Using those results, we developed a Markov model that followed a cohort of 40-year-old patients with type 1 diabetes over a 10-year time horizon. The primary outcomes were (i) the survival benefit of a pancreas transplant, (ii) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and (iii) total costs. Results We found no difference in survival advantage of PTA compared with standard of care (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.56–2.14). However, pancreas transplant ($172,823, 6.87 QALY) was cost-saving compared with standard of care ($232,897, 6.04 QALY) for type 1 diabetes. Pancreas transplantation was cost-effective in 95% of 10,000 simulations in probabilistic sensitivity analysis, using a $100,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Conclusions Although there is no difference in survival for PTA compared with standard of care, PTA is a cost-saving therapy for type 1 diabetes.

6591 Background: BMT CTN 1101 was a Phase III randomized controlled trial evaluating the comparative effectiveness of unrelated umbilical cord blood (UCB) versus HLA-haploidentical related donor bone marrow (haplo-BM) cell sources for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in patients with high-risk hematologic malignancies (leukemias, lymphomas). We report results of an economic evaluation conducted as part of the clinical trial. Methods: 368 patients (90% of planned accrual) enrolled from 33 centers in the U.S. were randomly assigned to unrelated UCB (n=186) or haplo-BM (n=182) transplant. Healthcare utilization and costs were estimated using propensity-score matched cohorts of BMT patients in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse for trial participants <65 years, and Medicare claims for trial participants ≥65 years. Cost-effectiveness was calculated from payer perspectives (commercial, Medicare) over a 20-year time horizon from time of transplant. Weibull models (best fit based on AIC/BIC) were used to extrapolate survival from 5-year trial follow-up data. Trial participant surveys (EQ-5D) were used to derive health state utilities for estimating Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty in results. Outcomes were discounted at 3% annually. Results: At 5-year follow-up, overall survival was 42% for haplo-BM versus 36% for UCB (P=.06). Over a 20-year time horizon, haplo-BM is expected to be more effective and more costly for <65 year-olds and in ≥65 year-olds it is expected to be more effective and less costly. In one-way uncertainty analyses, for persons <65, the cost/QALY result was most sensitive to life years and health state utilities. For persons ≥65, life years were more influential than costs and health state utilities. Using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, for persons <65 there was a 43% chance that haplo-BM was cost-effective using a willingness to pay threshold of $150k/QALY and 52% at a $200K/QALY threshold. Conclusions: Results from a large national clinical trial indicate that compared to UCB, haplo-BM was moderately cost-effective for patients aged <65 years, and less costly and more effective for persons ≥65 years. Haplo-BM is a fair value choice for commercially insured patients with high-risk leukemia and lymphoma who require HCT. For Medicare enrollees, haplo-BM is a preferred choice when considering costs and outcomes. [Table: see text]

Introduction: Teleneonatology (TN) allows remote neonatologists to provide real-time audio-video telemedicine support to community hospitals when neonates require advanced resuscitation or critical care. Currently, there are no published economic evaluations of U.S. TN programs. Objective: To evaluate the cost of TN from the perspective of the health care system. Methods: We constructed a decision tree comparing TN to usual care for neonates born in hospitals without a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) who require consultation. Our outcome of interest was total cost per patient, which included the incremental cost of a TN program, the cost of medical transport, and the cost of NICU or non-NICU hospitalization. We performed threshold sensitivity analyses where we varied each parameter to determine whether the base-case finding reverted. Results: For neonates requiring consultation after birth in a hospital without a NICU, TN was less costly ($16,878) than usual care ($28,047), representing a cost-savings of $11,168 per patient. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that at least one of the following conditions would need to be met for TN to no longer be cost saving compared to usual care: transfer rate with usual care <12% (base-case = 82%), TN reducing the odds of transfer by <8% (base-case = 52%), or TN cost exceeding $12,989 per patient (base-case = $1,821 per patient). Conclusions: Economic modeling from the health system perspective demonstrated that TN was cost saving compared to usual care for neonates requiring consultation following delivery in a non-NICU hospital. Understanding the cost savings associated with TN may influence organizational decisions regarding implementation, diffusion, and retention of these programs.

Objective: Despite the growing emphasis on healthcare costs, limited data address this aspect of care within the vestibular schwannoma (VS) literature. We sought to determine which strategy confers the lowest lifetime cost and greatest quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for patients with small- to medium-sized sporadic VS tumors. Study Design: A Markov model was created to determine the most cost-effective management algorithm. Tumor characteristics, magnetic resonance imaging surveillance schedule, treatment outcomes, and health-related quality of life values were derived from previously published data. Cost estimates were based on CMS Fee Schedule reimbursement rates. Setting: Economic Evaluation Service within the Kern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery. Patients: Patients diagnosed with small- to medium-sized sporadic VS. Interventions: Upfront microsurgery following diagnosis, upfront radiosurgery following diagnosis, observation with microsurgery reserved for observed tumor growth, and observation with radiosurgery reserved for observed tumor growth. Results: Across patient ages at time of diagnosis ranging from 18 to 70 years, observation with subsequent radiosurgery used for tumor growth was the most cost-effective management algorithm while upfront microsurgery was the least. When presented with a hypothetical 50-year-old patient, the strategy with the lowest lifetime cost and highest QALYs was observation with subsequent radiosurgery reserved for tumor growth ($32,161, 14.11 QALY), followed by observation with microsurgery reserved for tumor growth ($34,503, 13.94 QALY), upfront radiosurgery ($43,456, 14.02 QALY), and lastly, upfront microsurgery ($47,252, 13.60 QALY). Sensitivity analyses varying mortality rates, estimated costs, health-related quality of life, and progression to nonserviceable hearing demonstrated consistent ranking among treatments. Conclusions: When considering initial management of small- and medium-sized sporadic VSs, neither lifetime cost nor QALYs support upfront microsurgery or radiosurgery, even for younger patients. Initial observation with serial imaging, reserving radiosurgery or microsurgery for patients exhibiting tumor growth, confers the greatest potential for optimized lifetime healthcare cost and QALY outcomes.

Significance Statement Efficacy of rituximab (RTX) in ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) in patients with severe renal involvement (eGFR<30 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ) has not been addressed in clinical trials. This observational study did not find statistically significant differences between RTX and cyclophosphamide (CYC) for remission-induction therapy or any apparent benefit from the addition of plasma exchange (PLEX) to standard remission-induction therapy for patients with AAV and severe renal involvement. Although our analyses suggest that the benefits and risks of these therapeutic choices (RTX versus CYC with and without PLEX) are balanced, a randomized, controlled trial is needed to confirm these findings. Background Treatment of patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) and severe renal involvement is not established. We describe outcomes in response to rituximab (RTX) versus cyclophosphamide (CYC) and plasma exchange (PLEX). Methods A retrospective cohort study of MPO- or PR3-ANCA–positive patients with AAV (MPA and GPA) and severe kidney disease (eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ). Remission, relapse, ESKD and death after remission-induction with CYC or RTX, with or without the use of PLEX, were compared. Results Of 467 patients with active renal involvement, 251 had severe kidney disease. Patients received CYC ( n =161) or RTX ( n =64) for remission-induction, and 51 were also treated with PLEX. Predictors for ESKD and/or death at 18 months were eGFR <15 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 at diagnosis (IRR 3.09 [95% CI 1.49 to 6.40], P =0.002), renal recovery (IRR 0.27 [95% CI 0.12 to 0.64], P =0.003) and renal remission at 6 months (IRR 0.40 [95% CI 0.18 to 0.90], P =0.027). RTX was comparable to CYC in remission-induction (BVAS/WG=0) at 6 months (IRR 1.37 [95% CI 0.91 to 2.08], P =0.132). Addition of PLEX showed no benefit on remission-induction at 6 months (IRR 0.73 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.22], P =0.230), the rate of ESKD and/or death at 18 months (IRR 1.05 [95% CI 0.51 to 2.18], P =0.891), progression to ESKD (IRR 1.06 [95% CI 0.50 to 2.25], P =0.887), and survival at 24 months (IRR 0.54 [95% CI 0.16 to 1.85], P =0.330). Conclusions The apparent benefits and risks of using CYC or RTX for the treatment of patients with AAV and severe kidney disease are balanced. The addition of PLEX to standard remission-induction therapy showed no benefit in our cohort. A randomized controlled trial is the only satisfactory means to evaluate efficacy of remission-induction treatments in AAV with severe renal involvement.