Cost comparison of 111In-DTPA-octreotide scintigraphy and 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT for staging enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours
- 737 Downloads
Although somatostatin receptor positron emission tomography (PET)/CT is gaining increasing popularity and has shown its diagnostic superiority in several studies, 111In-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA)-octreotide is still the current standard for diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumours (NET). The aim of this study was to compare the costs for the two diagnostic tests and the respective consequential costs.
From January 2009 to July 2009, 51 consecutive patients with enteropancreatic NET who underwent contrast-enhanced 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT (n = 29) or 111In-DTPA-octreotide (mean 3 whole-body scans plus 1.6 low-dose single photon emission computed tomography/CT; n = 22) were included. For cost analysis, direct costs (equipment) and variable costs (material, labour) per examination were calculated. Additionally required CT and/or MRI examinations within the staging process were assessed as consequential costs. An additional deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed.
A 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT examination yielded total costs (equipment, personnel and material costs) of 548 €. On the other hand, an 111In-DTPA-octreotide examination resulted in 827 € total costs. Costs for equipment and material had a share of 460 €/720 € for 68Ga-DOTATOC/111In-DTPA-octreotide and labour costs of 89 €/106 €. With 68Ga-DOTATOC additional MRI had to be performed in 7% of the patients resulting in a mean of 20 € for supplementary imaging per patient; 82% of patients with 111In-DTPA-octreotide needed additional MRI and/or CT resulting in mean additional costs of 161 € per patient.
68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT was considerably cheaper than 111In-DTPA-octreotide with respect to both material and personnel costs. Furthermore, by using 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT considerably fewer additional examinations were needed reducing the consequential costs significantly.
KeywordsCost evaluation 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT 111In-DTPA-octreotide scintigraphy
Conflicts of interest
- 2.Klöppel G, Couvelard A, Perren A, Komminoth P, McNicol AM, Nilsson O, et al. ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the Standards of Care in Neuroendocrine Tumors: towards a standardized approach to the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and their prognostic stratification. Neuroendocrinology 2009;90(2):162–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Kowalski J, Henze M, Schuhmacher J, Mäcke HR, Hofmann M, Haberkorn U. Evaluation of positron emission tomography imaging using [68Ga]-DOTA-D Phe(1)-Tyr(3)-octreotide in comparison to [111In]-DTPAOC SPECT. First results in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. Mol Imaging Biol 2003;5(1):42–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Kocha W, Maroun J, Kennecke H, Law C, Metrakos P, Ouellet JF, et al. Consensus recommendations for the diagnosis and management of well-differentiated gastroenterohepatic neuroendocrine tumours: a revised statement from a Canadian National Expert Group. Curr Oncol 2010;17(3):49–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Sundin A, Vullierme MP, Kaltsas G, Plöckinger U, Mallorca Consensus Conference participants, European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society. ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the Standards of Care in Neuroendocrine Tumors: radiological examinations. Neuroendocrinology 2009;90(2):167–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Smith-Jones PM, Stolz B, Bruns C, Albert R, Reist HW, Fridrich R, et al. Gallium-67/gallium-68-[DFO]-octreotide–a potential radiopharmaceutical for PET imaging of somatostatin receptor-positive tumors: synthesis and radiolabeling in vitro and preliminary in vivo studies. J Nucl Med 1994;35(2):317–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 23.de Jong M, Bakker WH, Krenning EP, Breeman WA, van der Pluijm ME, Bernard BF, et al. Yttrium-90 and indium-111 labelling, receptor binding and biodistribution of [DOTA0, d-Phe1, Tyr3]octreotide, a promising somatostatin analogue for radionuclide therapy. Eur J Nucl Med 1997;24(4):368–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar