Cost Effectiveness of Risk-Reducing Mastectomy versus Surveillance in BRCA Mutation Carriers with a History of Ovarian Cancer
- 670 Downloads
The appropriate management of breast cancer risk in BRCA mutation carriers following ovarian cancer diagnosis remains unclear. We sought to determine the survival benefit and cost effectiveness of risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) among women with BRCA1/2 mutations following stage II–IV ovarian cancer.
We constructed a decision model from a third-party payer perspective to compare annual screening with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography to annual screening followed by RRM with reconstruction following ovarian cancer diagnosis. Survival, overall costs, and cost effectiveness were determined by decade at diagnosis using 2015 US dollars. All inputs were obtained from the literature and public databases. Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed with a $100,000 willingness-to-pay threshold.
The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per year of life saved (YLS) for RRM increased with age and BRCA2 mutation status, with greater survival benefit demonstrated in younger patients with BRCA1 mutations. RRM delayed 5 years in 40-year-old BRCA1 mutation carriers was associated with 5 months of life gained (ICER $72,739/YLS), and in 60-year-old BRCA2 mutation carriers was associated with 0.8 months of life gained (ICER $334,906/YLS). In all scenarios, $/YLS and mastectomies per breast cancer prevented were lowest with RRM performed 5–10 years after ovarian cancer diagnosis.
For most BRCA1/2 mutation carriers following ovarian cancer diagnosis, RRM performed within 5 years is not cost effective when compared with breast cancer screening. Imaging surveillance should be advocated during the first several years after ovarian cancer diagnosis, after which point the benefits of RRM can be considered based on patient age and BRCA mutation status.
- 9.National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. 2017. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp. Accessed 27 Feb 2017.
- 13.Society of Gynecologic Oncology. SGO Clinical Practice Statement: Genetic Testing for Ovarian Cancer. Society of Gynecologic Oncology; 2014.Google Scholar
- 14.Howlander N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2012. Based on November 2014 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, April 2015. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2012/. Accessed 5 Jan 2016.
- 17.Ledermann JA, Harter P, Gourley C, et al. Overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy: an updated analysis from a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(11):1579-1589.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Havrilesky LJ, Alvarez Secord A, Darcy KM, Armstrong DK, Kulasingam S. Cost effectiveness of intraperitoneal compared with intravenous chemotherapy for women with optimally resected stage III ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(25):4144-4150.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.Heemskerk-Gerritsen BA, Menke-Pluijmers MB, Jager A, et al. Substantial breast cancer risk reduction and potential survival benefit after bilateral mastectomy when compared with surveillance in healthy BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a prospective analysis. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(8):2029-2035.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.van der Burg ME, Onstenk W, Boere IA, et al. Long-term results of a randomised phase III trial of weekly versus three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum induction therapy followed by standard or extended three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum in European patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(15):2592-2601.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Aghajanian C, Goff B, Nycum LR, Wang YV, Husain A, Blank SV. Final overall survival and safety analysis of OCEANS, a phase 3 trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;139(1):10-16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 28.Lakhani SR, Van De Vijver MJ, Jacquemier J, et al. The pathology of familial breast cancer: predictive value of immunohistochemical markers estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2, and p53 in patients with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(9):2310-2318.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.Halfhill TR. Tom’s Inflation Calculator. 2016. http://www.halfhill.com/inflation_js.html. Accessed 23 May 2015.