nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.10.2015 | Clinical trial

Economic impact of 21-gene recurrence score testing on early-stage breast cancer in Ireland

verfasst von: Lillian Smyth, Geoff Watson, Elaine M. Walsh, Catherine M. Kelly, Maccon Keane, M. John Kennedy, Liam Grogan, Bryan T. Hennessy, Seamus O’Reilly, Linda E. Coate, Miriam O’Connor, Cecily Quinn, Katharina Verleger, Olaf Schoeman, Susan O’Reilly, Janice M. Walshe

Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Ausgabe 3/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The 21-gene test is a validated multi-gene diagnostic test that predicts chemotherapy (CT) benefit in oestrogen receptor positive (ER+), lymph node-negative (N0) breast cancer (BC) patients (pts). Ireland was the first public health care system to reimburse this test in Europe. Study objectives were to assess the impact of this test on decision-making and to analyse the economic impact of testing. Between October 2011 and February 2013, a national, retrospective, cross-sectional observational study of ER+, N0 BC pts tested with the 21-gene test was conducted. Surveyed breast medical oncologists, provided the assumption for the decision impact analysis that grade (G) 1 pts would not have received CT before testing and G2/3 pts would have received CT before testing. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed. 592 pts were identified; Low, intermediate and high recurrence score were identified in 53, 36 and 10 % pts, respectively. 384 (70 %) pts had G2, 129 (22 %) G3 and 76 (13 %) G1 tumours. Post testing, 345 pts (59 %) experienced a change in CT decision; 339 changed to hormone therapy alone and 6 advised to receive CT. 172 (30 %) pts received CT, 12 (3.9 %) of pts with low scores, 108 (50.9 %) of intermediate risk and 50 (90.9 %) of pts with high risk scores. Net reduction in CT use was 58 % and net savings achieved were €793,565. Since public reimbursement, the introduction of the 21-gene test has resulted in a significant reduction in chemotherapy administration and cost savings for the Irish public healthcare system.

Cancer in Ireland 2013: Annual report of the National Cancer Registry, 2013

National Cancer Registry C, Ireland (2012): Breast cancer incidence, mortality, treatment and survival in Ireland: 1994–2009

Fisher B, Brown AM, Dimitrov NV, Poisson R, Redmond C, Margolese RG, Bowman D, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL, Kardinal CG et al (1990) Two months of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide with and without interval reinduction therapy compared with 6 months of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in positive-node breast cancer patients with tamoxifen-nonresponsive tumors: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-15. J Clin Oncol 8(9):1483–1496PubMed

Shapiro CL, Recht A (2001) Side effects of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 344(26):1997–2008CrossRefPubMed

Fisher B, Jeong JH, Anderson S, Wolmark N (2004) Treatment of axillary lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer: updated findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 96(24):1823–1831CrossRefPubMed

Fisher B, Jeong JH, Bryant J, Anderson S, Dignam J, Fisher ER, Wolmark N (2004) Treatment of lymph-node-negative, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer: long-term findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project randomised clinical trials. Lancet 364(9437):858–868CrossRefPubMed

Dignam JJ, Dukic V, Anderson SJ, Mamounas EP, Wickerham DL, Wolmark N (2009) Hazard of recurrence and adjuvant treatment effects over time in lymph node-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 116(3):595–602PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Markopoulos C (2013) Overview of the use of Oncotype DX((R)) as an additional treatment decision tool in early breast cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 13(2):179–194CrossRefPubMed

Fisher B, Dignam J, Wolmark N, DeCillis A, Emir B, Wickerham DL, Bryant J, Dimitrov NV, Abramson N, Atkins JN et al (1997) Tamoxifen and chemotherapy for lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 89(22):1673–1682CrossRefPubMed

10.

Hornberger J, Cosler LE, Lyman GH (2005) Economic analysis of targeting chemotherapy using a 21-gene RT-PCR assay in lymph-node-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer. Am J Manag Care 11(5):313–324PubMed

11.

Palazzi M, De Tomasi D, D’Affronto C, Richetti A, Valli MC, Meregalli S, Asnaghi D, Arienti V, Cavallini D, Pradella R et al (2002) Are international guidelines for the prescription of adjuvant treatment for early breast cancer followed in clinical practice? Results of a population-based study on 1547 patients. Tumori 88(6):503–506PubMed

12.

Stiggelbout AM, de Haes JCJM, van de Velde CJH (2000) Adjuvant chemotherapy in node negative breast cancer: patterns of use and oncologists’ preferences. Ann Oncol 11(5):631–633CrossRefPubMed

13.

Nagel G, Rohrig B, Hoyer H, Wedding U, Katenkamp D (2003) A population-based study on variations in the use of adjuvant systemic therapy on postmenopausal patients with early stage breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 129(3):183–191PubMed

14.

Harlan LC, Abrams J, Warren JL, Clegg L, Stevens J, Ballard-Barbash R (2002) Adjuvant therapy for breast cancer: practice patterns of community physicians. J Clin Oncol 20(7):1809–1817CrossRefPubMed

15.

Barron JJ, Quimbo R, Nikam PT, Amonkar MM (2008) Assessing the economic burden of breast cancer in a US managed care population. Breast Cancer Res Treat 109(2):367–377CrossRefPubMed

16.

Broekx S, Den Hond E, Torfs R, Remacle A, Mertens R, D’Hooghe T, Neven P, Christiaens MR, Simoens S (2011) The costs of breast cancer prior to and following diagnosis. Eur J Health Econ 12(4):311–317CrossRefPubMed

17.

Dowsett M, Goldhirsch A, Hayes DF, Senn HJ, Wood W, Viale G (2007) International Web-based consultation on priorities for translational breast cancer research. Breast Cancer Res 9(6):R81PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

18.

Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J, Cronin M, Baehner FL, Walker MG, Watson D, Park T et al (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351(27):2817–2826CrossRefPubMed

19.

Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, Kim C, Baker J, Kim W, Cronin M, Baehner FL, Watson D, Bryant J et al (2006) Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24(23):3726–3734CrossRefPubMed

20.

Eiermann W, Rezai M, Kummel S, Kuhn T, Warm M, Friedrichs K, Schneeweiss A, Markmann S, Eggemann H, Hilfrich J et al (2013) The 21-gene recurrence score assay impacts adjuvant therapy recommendations for ER-positive, node-negative and node-positive early breast cancer resulting in a risk-adapted change in chemotherapy use. Ann Oncol 24(3):618–624PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

21.

Brufsky AM (2014) Predictive and prognostic value of the 21-gene recurrence score in hormone receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 37(4):404–410PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

22.

Asad J, Jacobson AF, Estabrook A, Smith SR, Boolbol SK, Feldman SM, Osborne MP, Boachie-Adjei K, Twardzik W, Tartter PI (2008) Does oncotype DX recurrence score affect the management of patients with early-stage breast cancer? Am J Surg 196(4):527–529CrossRefPubMed

23.

Lo SS, Mumby PB, Norton J, Rychlik K, Smerage J, Kash J, Chew HK, Gaynor ER, Hayes DF, Epstein A et al (2010) Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. J Clin Oncol 28(10):1671–1676CrossRefPubMed

24.

Oratz R, Paul D, Cohn AL, Sedlacek SM (2007) Impact of a commercial reference laboratory test recurrence score on decision making in early-stage breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 3(4):182–186PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

25.

Albanell J GJ, Holt S, Blohmer J, Eiermann W, Svedman C (2011) Meta-analysis of Prospective European Studies Assessing the Impact of Using the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay on Clinical Decision Making in Women with ER-positive, HER2-negative Early Stage Breast Cancer Presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS) San Antonio, TX, 6-10 Dec, 2011

26.

Hornberger J, Chien R (2010) Abstract P2-09-06: meta-analysis of the decision impact of the 21-gene breast cancer Recurrence Score in clinical practice. Cancer Res 70:P2-09-06

27.

Albanell J, Gonzalez A, Ruiz-Borrego M, Alba E, Garcia-Saenz JA, Corominas JM, Burgues O, Furio V, Rojo A, Palacios J et al (2012) Prospective transGEICAM study of the impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay and traditional clinicopathological factors on adjuvant clinical decision making in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) node-negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol 23(3):625–631CrossRefPubMed

28.

Yamauchi H, Nakagawa C, Takei H, Chao C, Yoshizawa C, Yagata H, Yoshida A, Hayashi N, Hell S, Nakamura S (2014) Prospective study of the effect of the 21-gene assay on adjuvant clinical decision-making in Japanese women with estrogen receptor-positive, node-negative, and node-positive breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 14(3):191–197CrossRefPubMed

29.

Klang SH, Hammerman A, Liebermann N, Efrat N, Doberne J, Hornberger J (2010) Economic implications of 21-gene breast cancer risk assay from the perspective of an Israeli-managed health-care organization. Value Health 13(4):381–387CrossRefPubMed

30.

Tsoi DT, Inoue M, Kelly CM, Verma S, Pritchard KI (2010) Cost-effectiveness analysis of recurrence score-guided treatment using a 21-gene assay in early breast cancer. Oncologist 15(5):457–465PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

31.

Kondo M, Hoshi SL, Yamanaka T, Ishiguro H, Toi M (2011) Economic evaluation of the 21-gene signature (Oncotype DX) in lymph node-negative/positive, hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer based on Japanese validation study (JBCRG-TR03). Breast Cancer Res Treat 127(3):739–749CrossRefPubMed

32.

Ireland NCfPN: Cost-effectiveness of Oncotype DX^® to target chemotherapy use in lymph-node-negative, oestrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer in Ireland. July 2011

33.

Hornberger J, Chien R, Krebs K, Hochheiser L (2011) US insurance program’s experience with a multigene assay for early-stage breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 7(3 Suppl):e38s–e45sPubMedCentralPubMed

34.

McGuire WL (1991) Breast cancer prognostic factors: evaluation guidelines. J Natl Cancer Inst 83(3):154–155CrossRefPubMed

35.

McGuire WL, Clark GM (1992) Prognostic factors and treatment decisions in axillary-node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 326(26):1756–1761CrossRefPubMed

36.

Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, Caplan R (1988) Relative worth of estrogen or progesterone receptor and pathologic characteristics of differentiation as indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer patients: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-06. J Clin Oncol 6(7):1076–1087PubMed

37.

Nguyen MT, Stessin A, Nagar H, D’Alfonso TM, Chen Z, Cigler T, Hayes MK, Shin SJ (2014) Impact of oncotype DX recurrence score in the management of breast cancer cases. Clin Breast Cancer 14(3):182–190CrossRefPubMed

38.

Oratz R, Kim B, Chao C, Skrzypczak S, Ory C, Bugarini R, Broder M (2011) Physician survey of the effect of the 21-gene recurrence score assay results on treatment recommendations for patients with lymph node-positive, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 7(2):94–99PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

39.

Holt S, Bertelli G, Humphreys I, Valentine W, Durrani S, Pudney D, Rolles M, Moe M, Khawaja S, Sharaiha Y et al (2013) A decision impact, decision conflict and economic assessment of routine Oncotype DX testing of 146 women with node-negative or pNImi, ER-positive breast cancer in the U.K. Br J Cancer 108(11):2250–2258PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

40.

Fried G, Moskovitz M (2014) Treatment decisions in estrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer patients with intermediate oncotype DX recurrence score results. SpringerPlus 3:71PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

41.

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00310180

42.

Bayt T BE, Rothney M, Sing AP. The 21-Gene Breast Cancer Assay: a roadmap of clinical evidence. In Abstract P248. St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference—Vienna, Austria, 2015

43.

Jaafar H et al (2014) Impact of Oncotype DX testing on adjuvant treatment decisions in patients with early breast cancer: a single-center study in the United Arab Emirates. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 10(4):354–360CrossRefPubMed

44.

Ademuyiwa FO, Miller A, O’Connor T, Edge SB, Thorat MA, Sledge GW, Levine E, Badve S (2011) The effects of oncotype DX recurrence scores on chemotherapy utilization in a multi-institutional breast cancer cohort. Breast Cancer Res Treat 126(3):797–802CrossRefPubMed

45.

Joh JE, Esposito NN, Kiluk JV, Laronga C, Lee MC, Loftus L, Soliman H, Boughey JC, Reynolds C, Lawton TJ et al (2011) The effect of Oncotype DX recurrence score on treatment recommendations for patients with estrogen receptor-positive early stage breast cancer and correlation with estimation of recurrence risk by breast cancer specialists. Oncologist 16(11):1520–1526PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

46.

de Boer RH, Baker C, Speakman D, Chao CY, Yoshizawa C, Mann GB (2013) The impact of a genomic assay (Oncotype DX) on adjuvant treatment recommendations in early breast cancer. Med J Aust 199(3):205–208CrossRefPubMed

47.

McVeigh TP, Hughes LM, Miller N, Sheehan M, Keane M, Sweeney KJ, Kerin MJ (2014) The impact of Oncotype DX testing on breast cancer management and chemotherapy prescribing patterns in a tertiary referral centre. Eur J Cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 50(16):2763–2770CrossRef

48.

Bargallo JE, Lara F, Shaw-Dulin R, Perez-Sanchez V, Villarreal-Garza C, Maldonado-Martinez H, Mohar-Betancourt A, Yoshizawa C, Burke E, Decker T et al (2015) A study of the impact of the 21-gene breast cancer assay on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in women with breast cancer in a Mexican public hospital. J Surg Oncol 111(2):203–207CrossRefPubMed

49.

Bodmer A HA, Diebold Berger S, Favet L, Guetty Alberto M, Exquis B. Abstract P241. St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference—Vienna, Austria 2015: Usefulness of the 21-Gene Assay to Guide Adjuvant Chemotherapy Decision-Making: Geneva Experience

50.

Davidson JA, Cromwell I, Ellard SL, Lohrisch C, Gelmon KA, Shenkier T, Villa D, Lim H, Sun S, Taylor S et al (2013) A prospective clinical utility and pharmacoeconomic study of the impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score(R) assay in oestrogen receptor positive node negative breast cancer. Eur J Cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) 49(11):2469–2475CrossRef

51.

Rouzier R, Pronzato P, Chéreau E, Carlson J, Hunt B, Valentine WJ (2013) Multigene assays and molecular markers in breast cancer: systematic review of health economic analyses. Breast Cancer Res Treat 139(3):621–637PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

52.

Bargallo-Rocha JE, Lara-Medina F, Perez-Sanchez V, Vazquez-Romo R, Villarreal-Garza C, Martinez-Said H, Shaw-Dulin RJ, Mohar-Betancourt A, Hunt B, Plun-Favreau J et al (2015) Cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene breast cancer assay in Mexico. Adv Ther 32(3):239–253CrossRefPubMed

53.

Lamond NW, Skedgel C, Younis T (2013) Is the 21-gene recurrence score a cost-effective assay in endocrine-sensitive node-negative breast cancer? Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 13(2):243–250CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Economic impact of 21-gene recurrence score testing on early-stage breast cancer in Ireland
verfasst von: Lillian Smyth
Geoff Watson
Elaine M. Walsh
Catherine M. Kelly
Maccon Keane
M. John Kennedy
Liam Grogan
Bryan T. Hennessy
Seamus O’Reilly
Linda E. Coate
Miriam O’Connor
Cecily Quinn
Katharina Verleger
Olaf Schoeman
Susan O’Reilly
Janice M. Walshe
Publikationsdatum: 01.10.2015
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Ausgabe 3/2015
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3555-4

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

25.04.2024 | Nierenkarzinom | Nachrichten

Springer Medizin

Economic impact of 21-gene recurrence score testing on early-stage breast cancer in Ireland

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

Alectinib verbessert krankheitsfreies Überleben bei ALK-positivem NSCLC

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Update Onkologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2015

RE: Bartula I, Sherman KA: Development and validation of the Female Sexual Function Index adaptation for breast cancer patients (FSFI-BC)

The risk of febrile neutropenia and need for G-CSF primary prophylaxis with the docetaxel and cyclophosphamide regimen in early-stage breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis

Survival of patients with de-novo metastatic breast cancer: analysis of data from a large breast cancer-specific private practice, a university-based cancer center and review of the literature

4-IHC classification of breast cancer subtypes in a large cohort of a clinical cancer registry: use in clinical routine for therapeutic decisions and its effect on survival

Stratifying triple-negative breast cancer prognosis using 18F-FDG-PET/CT imaging

BRCA1 and BARD1 colocalize mainly in the cytoplasm of breast cancer tumors, and their isoforms show differential expression

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

Alectinib verbessert krankheitsfreies Überleben bei ALK-positivem NSCLC

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Update Onkologie