A Systematic Review of the Economic Burden of Proton Therapy in Head and Neck Cancer

Bharathi R, Poovizhi; MS, Athiyamaan; Kamath, Ashwin

doi:10.31557/APJCP.2023.24.11.3643

A Systematic Review of the Economic Burden of Proton Therapy in Head and Neck Cancer

Document Type : Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Authors

¹ Department of Pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.

² Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.

10.31557/APJCP.2023.24.11.3643

Abstract

Background: Radiation therapy is used to treat head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Proton beam therapy (PBT) is one of the newer treatment options. This systematic review will describe the cost and cost-effectiveness of PBT compared with other first-line treatment options based on available literature and provide a better understanding of its usage in HNC in the future. Methods: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Systematic searches were conducted in PUBMED, EMBASE and SCOPUS till February 2022. Original pharmacoeconomic articles written in English that considered PBT for HNC were included; the title, abstract and full text of the search items were screened. The included studies were critically appraised using the Drummond Checklist followed by data extraction. Results: Eight of the ten included studies were of good quality; most were cost-effectiveness or cost comparison studies and used the Markov model and lifetime horizon. The dominant comparator was intensity-modulated radiotherapy. The willingness to pay threshold ranged from $30,828 to $150,000 per QALY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was between $4,436.1 and $695,000 per QALY. In HNC patients with human papillomavirus infection, the ICER was lower ($288,000/QALY) from the payer’s perspective, but much higher ($390,000/QALY) from the societal perspective. Conclusion: Our systematic review showed that appropriate patient selection can make PBT cost-effective. HPV-associated tumors can be cost-effectively treated with PBT. From the payer’s perspective, PBT is a cost-effective treatment option. In younger patients, PBT can result in lesser incidence of adverse effects, and hence, can reduce the subsequent need for long-term supportive care. Lower fractionation schedules can also make PBT a cost-effective treatment.

Keywords