Quality of Life and Cost Considerations: Y-90 Radioembolization

Abstract

Objective Transarterial radioembolization (TARE) offers a minimally invasive and safe treatment option for primary and metastatic hepatic malignancies. The benefits of TARE are manifold including prolonged overall survival, low associated morbidities, and improved time to progression allowing prolonged treatment-free intervals. The rapid development of new systemic therapies including immunotherapy has radically changed the treatment landscape for primary and metastatic liver cancer. Given the current climate, it is critical for interventional oncologists to understand the benefits of TARE relative to these other therapies. Therefore, this report aims to review quality-of-life outcomes and the cost comparisons of TARE as compared with systemic therapies.

Keywords

transarterial radioembolization - health-related quality of life - yttrium 90 - hepatocellular carcinoma - transarterial chemoembolization - interventional radiology

Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
07. Oktober 2021

• References

• 1 Meropol NJ, Weinfurt KP, Burnett CB. et al. Perceptions of patients and physicians regarding phase I cancer clinical trials: implications for physician-patient communication. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21 (13) 2589-2596
• 2 Xing M, Kokabi N, Camacho JC, Kim HS. Prospective longitudinal quality of life and survival outcomes in patients with advanced infiltrative hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein thrombosis treated with yttrium-90 radioembolization. BMC Cancer 2018; 18 (01) 75
• 3 Toro A, Pulvirenti E, Palermo F, Di Carlo I. Health-related quality of life in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatic resection, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, radiofrequency ablation or no treatment. Surg Oncol 2012; 21 (01) e23-e30
• 4 Gandhi S, Khubchandani S, Iyer R. Quality of life and hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastrointest Oncol 2014; 5 (04) 296-317
• 5 Ware Jr JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item Short-Form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30 (06) 473-483
• 6 Jensen MP, Chen C, Brugger AM. Interpretation of visual analog scale ratings and change scores: a reanalysis of two clinical trials of postoperative pain. J Pain 2003; 4 (07) 407-414
• 7 Salem R, Gilbertsen M, Butt Z. et al. Increased quality of life among hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with radioembolization, compared with chemoembolization. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11 (10) 1358-1365.e1
• 8 Salem R, Hassan S, Lewandowski RJ. et al. Quality of life after radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using a digital patient-reported outcome tool. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2020; 31 (02) 311-314.e1
• 9 Vilgrain V, Pereira H, Assenat E. et al; SARAH Trial Group. Efficacy and safety of selective internal radiotherapy with yttrium-90 resin microspheres compared with sorafenib in locally advanced and inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (SARAH): an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18 (12) 1624-1636
• 10 Chow PKH, Gandhi M, Tan SB. et al; Asia-Pacific Hepatocellular Carcinoma Trials Group. SIRveNIB: selective internal radiation therapy versus sorafenib in Asia-Pacific patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36 (19) 1913-1921
• 11 Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V. et al; SHARP Investigators Study Group. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2008; 359 (04) 378-390
• 12 Loffroy R, Ronot M, Greget M. et al; CIRT-FR Principal Investigators. Short-term safety and quality of life outcomes following radioembolization in primary and secondary liver tumours: a multi-centre analysis of 200 patients in France. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2021; 44 (01) 36-49
• 13 Cramer B, Xing M, Kim HS. Prospective longitudinal quality of life assessment in patients with neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases treated with 90Y radioembolization. Clin Nucl Med 2016; 41 (12) e493-e497
• 14 McDougall JA, Furnback WE, Wang BCM, Mahlich J. Understanding the global measurement of willingness to pay in health. J Mark Access Health Policy 2020; 8 (01) 1717030
• 15 Murray CJ, Evans DB, Acharya A, Baltussen RM. Development of WHO guidelines on generalized cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 2000; 9 (03) 235-251
• 16 Zhang P, Yang Y, Wen F. et al. Cost-effectiveness of sorafenib as a first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 27 (07) 853-859
• 17 Rostambeigi N, Dekarske AS, Austin EE, Golzarian J, Cressman EN. Cost effectiveness of radioembolization compared with conventional transarterial chemoembolization for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (07) 1075-1084
• 18 Ljuboja D, Ahmed M, Ali A. et al. Time-driven activity-based costing in interventional oncology: cost measurement and cost variability for hepatocellular carcinoma therapies. J Am Coll Radiol 2021; S1546–1440 (21) 00294-00295
• 19 Gabr A, Ali R, Al Asadi A. et al. Technical aspects and practical approach toward same-day Y90 radioembolization in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2019; 22 (02) 93-99
• 20 Gates VL, Marshall KG, Salzig K, Williams M, Lewandowski RJ, Salem R. Outpatient single-session yttrium-90 glass microsphere radioembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (02) 266-270
• 21 Cahalane A, Liu R, Shah S, Ganguli S. Abstract No. 551 comparison of 2- and 1-day hepatic Y-90 radioembolization protocols using time-driven activity-based costing analysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2018; 29 (04)
• 22 Pollock RF, Colaone F, Guardiola L, Shergill S, Brennan VK. A cost analysis of SIR-Spheres yttrium-90 resin microspheres versus tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in France, Italy, Spain and the UK. J Med Econ 2020; 23 (06) 593-602
• 23 Rognoni C, Ciani O, Sommariva S, Tarricone R. Real-world data for the evaluation of transarterial radioembolization versus sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Value Health 2017; 20 (03) 336-344
• 24 Vogel A, Cervantes A, Chau I. et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2019; 30 (05) 871-873
• 25 Carr BI, Carroll S, Muszbek N, Gondek K. Economic evaluation of sorafenib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 25 (11) 1739-1746
• 26 Muszbek N, Shah S, Carroll S. et al. Economic evaluation of sorafenib in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in Canada. Curr Med Res Opin 2008; 24 (12) 3559-3569
• 27 Marqueen KE, Kim E, Ang C, Mazumdar M, Buckstein M, Ferket BS. Cost-effectiveness analysis of selective internal radiotherapy with yttrium-90 versus sorafenib in locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. JCO Oncol Pract 2021; 17 (02) e266-e277
• 28 Chiang CL, Chan SK, Lee SF, Choi HC. First-line atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13 (05) 931
• 29 Soto-Perez-de-Celis E, Aguiar PN, Cordón ML, Chavarri-Guerra Y, Lopes GL. Cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib in the second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2019; 17 (06) 669-675
• 30 Chiang CL, Chan SK, Lee SF, Wong IO, Choi HC. Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab as a second-line therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4 (01) e2033761
• 31 Parikh ND, Singal AG, Hutton DW. Cost effectiveness of regorafenib as second-line therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer 2017; 123 (19) 3725-3731
• 32 Ghodadra A, Xing M, Zhang D, Kim HS. Yttrium-90 radioembolization is cost effective in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a SEER Medicare population study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2019; 30 (03) 293-297
• 33 Pennington B, Akehurst R, Wasan H. et al. Cost-effectiveness of selective internal radiation therapy using yttrium-90 resin microspheres in treating patients with inoperable colorectal liver metastases in the UK. J Med Econ 2015; 18 (10) 797-804
• 34 Uri I, Grozinsky-Glasberg S. Current treatment strategies for patients with advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). Clin Diabetes Endocrinol 2018; 4: 16
• 35 Rustgi SD, Oh A, Yang JY. et al. Initiation of somatostatin analogues for neuroendocrine tumor patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Cancer 2021; 21 (01) 597
• 36 Fazio N, Buzzoni R, Delle Fave G. et al. Everolimus in advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, non-functional neuroendocrine tumors: RADIANT-4 lung subgroup analysis. Cancer Sci 2018; 109 (01) 174-181
• 37 Chua A, Perrin A, Ricci JF, Neary MP, Thabane M. Cost-effectiveness of everolimus for the treatment of advanced neuroendocrine tumours of gastrointestinal or lung origin in Canada. Curr Oncol 2018; 25 (01) 32-40 [published correction appears in Curr Oncol 2018;25(4):e354–e355]
• 38 Mujica-Mota R, Varley-Campbell J, Tikhonova I. et al. Everolimus, lutetium-177 DOTATATE and sunitinib for advanced, unresectable or metastatic neuroendocrine tumours with disease progression: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Technol Assess 2018; 22 (49) 1-326