Display options
Cite
Hatam N, Ahmadloo N, Vazirzadeh M, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Intensive Vs. Standard Follow-Up Models for Patients with Breast Cancer in Shiraz, Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016;17(12):5309-5314doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5309.
Hatam, N., Ahmadloo, N., Vazirzadeh, M., Jafari, A., & Askarian, M. (2016). Cost-Effectiveness of Intensive Vs. Standard Follow-Up Models for Patients with Breast Cancer in Shiraz, Iran. Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 17(12), 5309-5314. https://doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5309
Hatam, Nahid, et al. "Cost-Effectiveness of Intensive Vs. Standard Follow-Up Models for Patients with Breast Cancer in Shiraz, Iran." Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP vol. 17,12 (2016): 5309-5314. doi: https://doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5309
Hatam N, Ahmadloo N, Vazirzadeh M, Jafari A, Askarian M. Cost-Effectiveness of Intensive Vs. Standard Follow-Up Models for Patients with Breast Cancer in Shiraz, Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016 Dec 01;17(12):5309-5314. doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5309. PMID: 28125878; PMCID: PMC5454675.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016 Dec 01;17(12):5309-5314. doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5309.

Cost-Effectiveness of Intensive Vs. Standard Follow-Up Models for Patients with Breast Cancer in Shiraz, Iran.

Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP

Nahid Hatam, Niloofar Ahmadloo, Mina Vazirzadeh, Abdossaleh Jafari, Mehrdad Askarian

Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Service Administration, School of Management and Information Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. Email:[email protected]

PMID: 28125878 PMCID: PMC5454675 DOI: 10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5309

Abstract

Background: Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer amongst women throughout the world. Currently, there are various follow-up strategies implemented in Iran, which are usually dependent on clinic policies and agreement among the resident oncologists. Purpose: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of intensive follow-up versus standard models for early breast cancer patients in Iran. Materials and methods: This cross sectional study was performed with 382 patients each in the intensive and standard groups. Costs were identified and measured from a payer perspective, including direct medical outlay. To assess the effectiveness of the two follow-up models we used a decision tree along with indicators of detection of recurrence and metastasis, calculating expected costs and effectiveness for both cases; in addition, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were determined. Results: The results of decision tree showed expected case detection rates of 0.137 and 0.018 and expected costs of US$24,494.62 and US$6,859.27, respectively, for the intensive and standard follow-up models. Tornado diagrams revealed the highest sensitivity to cost increases using the intensive follow-up model with an ICER=US$148,196.2. Conclusion: Overall, the results showed that the intensive follow-up method is not cost-effective when compared to the standard model.

Creative Commons Attribution License

Keywords: Breast cancer; cost-effectiveness; follow-up; intensive; standard

References

  1. Breast. 2012 Dec;21(6):693-700 - PubMed
  2. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005 Oct;93(3):255-60 - PubMed
  3. J Oncol Pract. 2012 Mar;8(2):79-83 - PubMed
  4. BMC Cancer. 2007 Jan 02;7:1 - PubMed
  5. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Mar;21(3):733-7 - PubMed
  6. Br J Surg. 2012 Sep;99(9):1227-33 - PubMed
  7. Breast J. 2007 Nov-Dec;13(6):571-4 - PubMed
  8. Iran J Public Health. 2015 Sep;44(9):1225-33 - PubMed
  9. Value Health. 2004 Sep-Oct;7(5):518-28 - PubMed
  10. Eur J Cancer. 2011 May;47(8):1175-85 - PubMed
  11. Saudi Med J. 2006 Aug;27(8):1187-93 - PubMed
  12. JAMA. 1994 May 25;271(20):1593-7 - PubMed
  13. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013 Feb 20;105(4):280-92 - PubMed
  14. Ann Oncol. 2007 Mar;18(3):581-92 - PubMed
  15. JAMA. 1994 May 25;271(20):1587-92 - PubMed
  16. Arch Iran Med. 2010 Mar;13(2):143-6 - PubMed
  17. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 27;(5):CD001768 - PubMed
  18. Iran J Cancer Prev. 2015 Oct;8(5):e4061 - PubMed
  19. Fam Pract. 2013 Oct;30(5):525-32 - PubMed

Publication Types