Intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel versus intravenous carboplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy for Stage III ovarian cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Objective. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy as front-line treatment for patients with Stage III epithelia] ovarian cancer following optimal primary cytoreductive surgery. Methods. Based on Gynecologic Oncology Group protocols #172 and #158, a decision analysis model was created to compare two treatment strategies for patients with optimal residual disease Stage III ovarian cancer: (1) inpatient intravenous paclitaxel (24 h) and intraperitoneal cisplatin plus outpatient intraperitoneal paclitaxel chemotherapy (IP/TV), and (2) outpatient intravenous paclitaxel (3 h) and carboplatin chemotherapy (IV/M. The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated from the perspective of society. Results. Cost-effectiveness analysis revealed that the strategy of IP/IV chemotherapy had an overall cost per patient of $39,861 and effectiveness of 5.16 QALYs compared to $18,822 and 4.59 QALYs for IV/IV chemotherapy. The IP/IV chemotherapy strategy was associated with an additional 0.56 QALYs at an incremental cost of $21,039. The incremental C/E ratio for IP/IV chemotherapy was $37,454/QALY. Inpatient treatment accounted for 43.2% of the cost of IP/IV chemotherapy. Sensitivity analysis testing confirmed the robustness of the model. Conclusions. In this model, IP/IV chemotherapy was associated with a modest extension in quality-adjusted survival time but was also more costly than IV/IV chemotherapy. On balance, the IP/IV strategy can be considered a good healthcare value. However, these data also suggest that efforts to reduce the cost of IP/IV chemotherapy, such as through development of an ambulatory regimen with equivalent therapeutic efficacy but an improved toxicity profile, would improve the overall value of this adjuvant treatment program. C 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.