Surveillance for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia following molar pregnancy: a cost-effectiveness analysis

被引:4
|
作者
Albright, Benjamin B. [1 ]
Myers, Evan R. [1 ]
Moss, Haley A. [1 ]
Ko, Emily M. [2 ]
Sonalkar, Sarita [2 ]
Havrilesky, Laura J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Durham, NC 27710 USA
[2] Univ Penn Hlth Syst, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Philadelphia, PA USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
cost-effectiveness analysis; gestational trophoblastic neoplasia; Markov model; molar pregnancy; UNDETECTABLE HCG LEVELS; LOW-RISK; CHEMOTHERAPY; METHOTREXATE; MANAGEMENT; QUALITY; EVACUATION; DIAGNOSIS; RELAPSE; EMA/CO;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajog.2021.05.031
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Historically, published guidelines for care after molar pregnancy recommended monitoring human chorionic gonadotropin levels for the development of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia until normal and then for 6 months after the first normal human chorionic gonadotropin. However, there are little data underlying such recommendations, and recent evidence has demonstrated that gestational trophoblastic neoplasia diagnosis after human chorionic gonadotropin normalization is rare. OBJECTIVE: We sought to estimate the cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for surveillance for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia after human chorionic gonadotropin normalization after complete and partial molar pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: A Markov-based cost-effectiveness model, using monthly cycles and terminating after 36 months/cycles, was constructed to compare alternative strategies for asymptomatic human chorionic gonadotropin surveillance after the first normal (none; monthly testing for 1, 3, 6, and 12 months; or every 3-month testing for 3, 6, and 12 months) for both complete and partial molar pregnancy. The risk of reduced surveillance was modeled by increasing the probability of high-risk disease at diagnosis. Probabilities, costs, and utilities were estimated from peer-reviewed literature, with all cost data applicable to the United States and adjusted to 2020 US dollars. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year ($/quality-adjusted life year) with a $100,000/quality-adjusted life year willingness-to-pay threshold. RESULTS: Under base-case assumptions, we found no further surveillance after the first normal human chorionic gonadotropin to be the dominant strategy from both the healthcare system and societal perspectives, for both complete and partial molar pregnancy. After complete mole, this strategy had the lowest average cost (healthcare system, $144 vs maximum $283; societal, $152 vs maximum $443) and highest effectiveness (2.711 vs minimum 2.682 quality-adjusted life years). This strategy led to a slightly higher rate of death from gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (0.013% vs minimum 0.009%), although with high costs per gestational trophoblastic neoplasia death avoided (range, $214,000 to >$4 million). Societal perspective costs of lost wages had a greater impact on frequent surveillance costs than rare gestational trophoblastic neoplasia treatment costs, and no further surveillance was more favorable from this perspective in otherwise identical analyses. No further surveillance remained dominant or preferred with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of <$100,000 in all analyses for partial mole, and most sensitivity analyses for complete mole. Under the assumption of no disutility from surveillance, surveillance strategies were more effective (by quality-adjusted life year) than no further surveillance, and a single human chorionic gonadotropin test at 3 months was found to be cost-effective after complete mole with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $53,261 from the healthcare perspective, but not from the societal perspective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $288,783). CONCLUSION: Largely owing to the rare incidence of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia after human chorionic gonadotropin normalization after molar pregnancy, prolonged surveillance is not cost-effective under most assumptions. It would be reasonable to reduce, and potentially eliminate, current recommendations for surveillance after human chorionic gonadotropin normalization after molar pregnancy, particularly among partial moles. With any reduction in surveillance, patients should be counseled on symptoms of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia and established in routine gynecologic care.
引用
收藏
页码:513.e1 / 513.e19
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Differential diagnosis of non-molar gestational trophoblastic neoplasia with ectopic pregnancy by clinical-pathological features
    Han, Xiaoxiao
    Qian, Xueqian
    Wan, Xiaoyun
    Chen, Yaxia
    Chen, Lili
    ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2024, 310 (04) : 2161 - 2166
  • [32] RISK STRATIFICATION OF GESTATIONAL TROPHOBLASTIC NEOPLASIA: PROGNOSTIC ROLE OF TRANSVAGINAL ULTRASOUND IN PATIENTS AFTER MOLAR PREGNANCY.
    Giorgione, V.
    Masciangelo, R.
    Mangili, G.
    Candiani, M.
    Petrone, M.
    Valsecchi, L.
    Rabaiotti, E.
    Cavoretto, P.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2015, 25 (09) : 664 - 664
  • [33] Multicenter Analysis of Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia in Turkey
    Ozalp, Sabit Sinan
    Telli, Elcin
    Oge, Tufan
    Tulunay, Gokhan
    Boran, Nurettin
    Turan, Taner
    Yenen, Mufit
    Kurdoglu, Zehra
    Ozler, Ali
    Yuce, Kunter
    Ulker, Volkan
    Arvas, Macit
    Demirkiran, Fuat
    Bese, Tugan
    Tokgozoglu, Nedim
    Onan, Anil
    Sanci, Muzaffer
    Gokcu, Mehmet
    Tosun, Gokhan
    Dikmen, Yilmaz
    Ozsaran, Aydin
    Terek, Mustafa Cosan
    Akman, Levent
    Yetimalar, Hakan
    Kilic, Derya Sakarya
    Gungor, Tayfun
    Ozgu, Emre
    Yildiz, Yunus
    Kokcu, Arif
    Kefeli, Mehmet
    Kuruoglu, Serkan
    Yuksel, Hasan
    Guvenal, Tevfik
    Hasdemir, Pinar Solmaz
    Ozcelik, Bulent
    Serin, Serdar
    Dolanbay, Mehmet
    Arioz, Dagistan Tolga
    Tuncer, Nadire
    Bozkaya, Hasan
    Guven, Suleyman
    Kulaksiz, Deniz
    Varol, Fusun
    Yanik, Ali
    Ogurlu, Gonca
    Simsek, Tayyup
    Toptas, Tayfun
    Dogan, Selen
    Camuzoglu, Hakan
    Api, Murat
    ASIAN PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION, 2014, 15 (08) : 3625 - 3628
  • [34] Complete molar pregnancy in adolescents from North and South America: Clinical presentation and risk of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia
    Soares, Renan Rocha
    Maesta, Izildinha
    Colon, Jose
    Braga, Antonio
    Salazar, Aleydah
    Charry, Rafael Cortes
    Sun, Sue Yazaki
    Goldstein, Donald P.
    Berkowitz, Ross S.
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2016, 142 (03) : 496 - 500
  • [35] State-of-the-Art Workup and Initial Management of Newly Diagnosed Molar Pregnancy and Postmolar Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia
    Elias, Kevin M.
    Berkowitz, Ross S.
    Horowitz, Neil S.
    JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2019, 17 (11): : 1396 - 1401
  • [36] Rapid progression from complete molar pregnancy to post-molar gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: a rare case report and literature review
    Qian, Jing
    Gracious, Kaoma
    Sun, Liping
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2023, 13
  • [37] Early pregnancy following multidrug regimen chemotherapy in a gestational trophoblastic neoplasia patient: A case report
    Niu, Gang
    Yuan, Lin-Jing
    Gong, Feng-Qiu
    Yang, Juan
    Zhu, Cai-Xia
    Shen, Hong-Wei
    MEDICINE, 2017, 96 (51)
  • [38] Gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: A unique challenge in caesarean scar pregnancy
    Tambe, Sanjaykumar G.
    Goel, Khushboo
    Sambharam, Kavita
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2021, 264 : 381 - 382
  • [39] Placental-site trophoblastic tumor following metastatic gestational trophoblastic neoplasia
    Schneider, D
    Halperin, R
    Segal, M
    Bukovsky, I
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 1996, 63 (02) : 267 - 269
  • [40] Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stool DNA or Colonoscopy for Colorectal Neoplasia Surveillance in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis
    Kisiel, John B.
    Konijeti, Gauree G.
    Piscitello, Andrew J.
    Chandra, Tarun
    Goss, Thomas
    Ahlquist, David A.
    Farraye, Francis A.
    Ananthakrishnan, Ashwin
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2015, 148 (04) : S199 - S199