Logo Logo
Hilfe
Hilfe
Switch Language to English

Schnitzer, Moritz L.; Froelich, Matthias F.; Gassert, Felix G.; Huber, Thomas; Gresser, Eva; Schwarze, Vincent; Noerenberg, Dominik; Todica, Andrei und Rübenthaler, Johannes (2020): Follow-Up 18F-FDG PET/CT versus Contrast-Enhanced CT after Ablation of Liver Metastases of Colorectal Carcinoma-A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. In: Cancers, Bd. 12, Nr. 9, 2432

Volltext auf 'Open Access LMU' nicht verfügbar.

Abstract

Purpose: After a percutaneous ablation of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), follow-up investigations to evaluate potential tumor recurrence are necessary. The aim of this study was to analyze whether a combined 18F-Fluordesoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) scan is cost-effective compared to a contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) scan for detecting local tumor progression. Materials and Methods: A decision model based on Markov simulations that estimated lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was developed. Model input parameters were obtained from the recent literature. Deterministic sensitivity analysis of diagnostic parameters based on a Monte-Carlo simulation with 30,000 iterations was performed. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) was set to $100,000/QALY. Results: In the base-case scenario, CE-CT resulted in total costs of $28,625.08 and an efficacy of 0.755 QALYs, whereas 18F-FDG PET/CT resulted in total costs of $29,239.97 with an efficacy of 0.767. Therefore, the corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 18F-FDG PET/CT was $50,338.96 per QALY indicating cost-effectiveness based on the WTP threshold set above. The results were stable in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Based on our model, 18F-FDG PET/CT can be considered as a cost-effective imaging alternative for follow-up investigations after percutaneous ablation of colorectal liver metastases.

Dokument bearbeiten Dokument bearbeiten