高级搜索
动脉化疗栓塞术预防肝癌根治性切除术后肿瘤复发的成本效果分析[J]. 肿瘤防治研究, 2015, 42(04): 350-355. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2015.04.007
引用本文: 动脉化疗栓塞术预防肝癌根治性切除术后肿瘤复发的成本效果分析[J]. 肿瘤防治研究, 2015, 42(04): 350-355. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2015.04.007
Cost Effectiveness of Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization for Preventing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence After Radical Resection[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2015, 42(04): 350-355. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2015.04.007
Citation: Cost Effectiveness of Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization for Preventing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence After Radical Resection[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2015, 42(04): 350-355. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2015.04.007

动脉化疗栓塞术预防肝癌根治性切除术后肿瘤复发的成本效果分析

Cost Effectiveness of Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization for Preventing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence After Radical Resection

  • 摘要: 目的 建立肝细胞癌(简称肝癌)根治性切除术后预防性动脉化疗栓塞术(transcatheter arterial chemoembolization,TACE)治疗的卫生经济学评价模型。方法 140例肝癌患者根治性切除术后分为TACE组和非TACE组(即门诊随访组),收集两组治疗方案直接医疗成本和治疗效果(复发率及无瘤生存时间),进行成本效果分析、增量成本效果分析和敏感度分析。结果 (1)40例非TACE组患者门诊总平均费用为7 121.44元/人;100例TACE组患者复发前总费用为2 8250.45元/人。(2)非TACE组和TACE组的1、2、3、4、5年复发率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组无瘤生存时间比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.322)。(3)非TACE组的成本效果比为389.15元/月,TACE组为1 278.30元/月,增量成本效果比为5 560.27元/月。(4)敏感度分析中非TACE组的成本度效果比为350.84元/月,TACE组为1 215.81元/月,增量成本效果比为5 381.35元/月。结论 从卫生经济学角度,预防肝癌术后复发,预防性TACE并不是最优方案,至少不是每个患者都应该或都适合做,在相同的效果下(复发率、无瘤生存时间)门诊随访治疗可能更经济。

     

    Abstract: Objective To establish the health economics evaluation model of preventative transcatheter arterial chemoembolization(TACE) on hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) patients after radical resection. Methods A total of 140 HCC patients were divided into TACE group and non-TACE group after radical resection. In TACE group, TACEs were performed; and in non-TACE group, only follow-up visits through outpatient department were performed. Direct medical costs of two groups were collected. Recurrent rate and tumor free survival were picked up as effectiveness. Then cost effectiveness and incremental cost effectiveness were analyzed. At last, the sensitivity analysis was also conducted. Results (1) In non-TACE group, the average cost for the outpatient care was 7 121.44 yuan per patient. Meanwhile, in TACE group, the total cost was 2 8250.45 yuan per patient before tumor recurrences. (2) The tumor free survival rates for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 years between non-TACE group and TACE group were similar, without significant difference(P>0.05).And the tumor free survivals were also similar between two groups (P=0.322). (3) The cost effectiveness ratio was 389.15 yuan/month in non-TACE group while 1 278.30 yuan/month in TACE group. And the incremental cost effectiveness ratio was 5 560.27 yuan/month. (4) According to the sensitivity analysis, the cost effectiveness ratio was 350.84 yuan/month in non-TACE group while 1 215.81 yuan/month in TACE group. And the incremental cost effectiveness ratio was 5 381.35 yuan/month. Conclusion According to the health economics, the preventative treatment of TACE after radical resection for HCC patients is not the best choice, at least is not suitable for every case. It seems that the outpatient care is more economic under the similar effectiveness, recurrent rate and tumor free survival.

     

/

返回文章
返回