Abstract
Patients with metastatic, Estrogen Receptor (ER) positive, HER2-negative, breast cancer, before initiating CDK4/6 inhibitors, receive either single agent endocrine- or chemotherapy based on their clinical risk. In this first-ever trial-based economic evaluation of Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs), the cost-effectiveness of standardizing the prescription of endocrine- or chemotherapy using a CTC count threshold (with >5 CTCs/7.5mL indicative of unfavorable disease outcomes) was compared to current clinical practice. N=755 ER+ HER2-patients, enrolled in 17 French centres, were randomized to CTC guided or standard of care and were treated according to either through the CTC score or clinical examination. Health state utilities were calculated by mapping the QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D utilities and used to calculate Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) over a 2-year time horizon. Bootstrapping and additional sensitivity analyses were performed to quantify the impact of uncertainty. Health outcomes in both arms were similar, but costs were higher in the CTC guided arm (€19,403) compared to the usual care (€18,254), resulting in an ICER of €104,078/QALY in favor of usual care. However, when the analysis was performed for the clinically high- and low-risk groups separately, CTC enumeration could be a dominant strategy (cost saving) if treatment is de-escalated in clinically high-risk patients as indicated by CTC scores. However, the current analysis was based on the PFS and OS data reported in 2021 and long-term Overall Survival data is collected since then (JCO, 2023 in press). A further analysis of the health economic impact of CTC enumeration in clinically low and high-risk groups is therefore indicated.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr Bidard reported receiving grants and nonfinancial support from Menarini Silicon Biosystems during the conduct of the study; grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Pfizer, Lilly, and Novartis; grants from Freenome; and personal fees from ArcherDX and Radius outside the submitted work. Dr. Berger reported receiving grants from Ministere des solidarites et de la Santa (France) during the conduct of the study. Dr Alix-Panabieres reported receiving grants from Menarini during the conduct of the study. Dr Pierga reported receiving grants from Menarini during the conduct of the study; and grants and personal fees from Roche and personal fees from Pfizer, Novartis, and Lilly outside the submitted work. No other conflicts were declared at the moment of conducting and reporting of this study.
Clinical Trial
NCT01710605
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All patients provided written informed consent before enrollment. The clinical trial, from which data was used, was approved by a national ethics committee (CPP Ile-de-France 3). This study followed the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) reporting guideline
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos