A cost-consequence model of using the 21-gene assay to identify patients with early-stage node-positive breast cancer who benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in the Netherlands

Patients with early-stage hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) negative invasive breast cancer with 1–3 positive lymph nodes (N1) often undergo surgical excisions followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT). Many patients have no benefit from ACT and receive unnecessary, costly treatment often associated with short- and long-term adverse events (AEs). Gene expression profiling (GEP) assays, such as the 21-gene assay (i.e. the Oncotype DX assay), can identify patients at higher risk for recurrence who may benefit from ACT. However, the budgetary consequence of... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Martijn J. H. G. Simons
Peter M. Machielsen
Jelle A. Spoorendonk
Tim Ignacio
Pieter B. Drost
Tim Jacobs
Felix E. de Jongh
Dokumenttyp: Text
Erscheinungsdatum: 2024
Schlagwörter: Medicine / Pharmacology / Cancer / Science Policy / Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified / 21-gene / gene expression profiling / early stage / hormone receptor / human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 / breast cancer / lymph node positive / adjuvant chemotherapy / cost-consequence analysis / A11 / A1 / A / C21 / C2 / C / C51 / C5
Sprache: unknown
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-29601700
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25334767.v2

Patients with early-stage hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) negative invasive breast cancer with 1–3 positive lymph nodes (N1) often undergo surgical excisions followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT). Many patients have no benefit from ACT and receive unnecessary, costly treatment often associated with short- and long-term adverse events (AEs). Gene expression profiling (GEP) assays, such as the 21-gene assay (i.e. the Oncotype DX assay), can identify patients at higher risk for recurrence who may benefit from ACT. However, the budgetary consequence of using the Oncotype DX assay versus no GEP testing in the Netherlands is unknown. Our study therefore assessed it using a cost-consequence model. A validated model was used to create the N1 model. The model compared the costs and consequences of using the Oncotype DX assay versus no GEP testing and MammaPrint, and subsequent ACT use with corresponding costs for chemotherapy, treatment of AEs, productivity losses, GEP testing, and treatment of recurrences, according to the Oncotype DX results. The model time horizon was 5 years. Costs for the total population amounted to €8.0 million (M), €16.2 M, and €9.5 M, and cost per patient amounted to €13,540, €27,455, and €16,154 for using the Oncotype DX assay, no GEP testing, and MammaPrint, respectively. Total cost savings of using the Oncotype DX assay amounted to €8.2 M versus no GEP testing and €1.5 M versus MammaPrint. Using the Oncotype DX assay would result in fewer patients receiving ACT and thus fewer AEs, sick days, and hospitalizations, leading to overall cost savings compared with no GEP testing and MammaPrint. Implementing Oncotype DX testing in this population can prevent unnecessary overtreatment, reducing clinical and economic burden on the patient and Dutch healthcare system. Early-stage invasive breast cancer patients often undergo surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. However, many of these patients have no benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy and thus receive ...