4.6 Article

Cost-Effectiveness of Nutrient Supplementation in Cancer Survivors

Journal

CANCERS
Volume 13, Issue 24, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers13246276

Keywords

vitamin; mineral; nutrition; cancer; nutritional deficiency; supplementation; cost-effectiveness; QOL

Categories

Funding

  1. Pharmavite LLC.
  2. NCI Interdisciplinary Training Grant in Cancer Epidemiology [T32CA113951]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study investigated the prevalence and cost-effectiveness of dietary supplementation in cancer survivors, finding that supplementation can reduce hospitalization rates and improve quality of life. Further research is needed to determine the specific effects of supplementation on long-term outcomes by cancer type.
Simple Summary Cancer patients and cancer survivors are at risk for malnutrition from both their disease and its treatment. Many cancer survivors use dietary supplementation without informing their doctors. The goal of this study was to examine the prevalence and cost-effectiveness of dietary supplementation in a nationally representative sample of cancer survivors in the U.S. by looking at intake and hospitalization records. Adequate nutrition is a cost-effective way to promote well-being More research needs to be carried out so providers can offer the best nutrition to the right patients at the right time. Cancer patients are at risk for malnutrition; the aim of this study was to provide a cost-effectiveness analysis of dietary supplementation in cancer survivors. We estimated prevalence of supplementation, hospitalization rates, quality of life (QOL), cost of care and mortality among cancer survivors. We built a decision analytic model to simulate life-long costs of health care and supplementation and QOL among cancer survivors with and without supplementation. Cost of supplements was derived from national pharmacy databases including single- and multivitamin formularies. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to evaluate the robustness of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) to changes in supplementation costs and duration. The study cohort represented the national cancer survivor population (average age 61 years, 85% white, 52% male, and 94% insured). Hospitalization rates for supplement users and non-users were 12% and 21%, respectively. The cost of hospitalization was $4030. Supplementation was associated with an additional 0.48 QALYs (10.26 vs. 9.78) at the incremental cost of $2094 ($236,933 vs. $234,839) over the remaining lifetime of survivors (on average 13 years). Adequate nutrition provides a cost-effective strategy to achieving potentially optimum health. Further studies are needed to determine the effects of specific nutrient doses and supplementation on long-term outcomes per cancer type.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available