BackgroundProcalcitonin (PCT) testing can help in safely reducing antibiotic treatment duration in intensive care patients with sepsis. However, the cost-effectiveness of such PCT guidance is not yet known.MethodsA trial-based analysis was performed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of PCT guidance compared with standard of care (without PCT guidance). Patient-level data were used from the SAPS trial in which 1546 patients were randomised. This trial was performed in the Netherlands, which is a country with, on average, low antibiotic use and a short duration of hospital stay. As quality of life among sepsis survivors was not measured during the SAPS, this was derived from a Dutch follow-up study. Outcome measures were (1) incremental direct hospital cost and (2) incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from a healthcare perspective over a one-year time horizon. Uncertainty in outcomes was assessed with bootstrapping.ResultsMean in-hospital costs were €46,081/patient in the PCT group compared with €46,146/patient with standard of care (i.e. − €65 (95% CI − €6314 to €6107); − 0.1%). The duration of the first course of antibiotic treatment was lower in the PCT group with 6.9 vs. 8.2 days (i.e. − 1.2 days (95% CI − 1.9 to − 0.4), − 14.8%). This was accompanied by lower in-hospital mortality of 21.8% vs. 29.8% (absolute decrease 7.9% (95% CI − 13.9% to − 1.8%), relative decrease 26.6%), resulting in an increase in mean QALYs/patient from 0.47 to 0.52 (i.e. + 0.05 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.10); + 10.1%). However, owing to high costs among sepsis survivors, healthcare costs over a one-year time horizon were €73,665/patient in the PCT group compared with €70,961/patient with standard of care (i.e. + €2704 (95% CI − €4495 to €10,005), + 3.8%), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €57,402/QALY gained. Within this time frame, the probability of PCT guidance being cost-effective was 64% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €80,000/QALY.ConclusionsAlthough the impact of PCT guidance on total healthcare-related costs during the initial hospitalisation episode is likely negligible, the lower in-hospital mortality may lead to a non-significant increase in costs over a one-year time horizon. However, since uncertainty remains, it is recommended to investigate the long-term cost-effectiveness of PCT guidance, from a societal perspective, in different countries and settings.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-018-2234-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

For using counts of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in the clinic to aid a physician's decision, its reported values will need to be accurate and comparable between institutions. Many technologies have become available to enumerate and characterize CTCs, thereby showing a large range of reported values. Here we introduce an Open Source CTC scoring tool to enable comparison of different reviewers and facilitate the reach of a consensus on assigning objects as CTCs. One hundred images generated from two different platforms were used to assess concordance between 15 reviewers and an expert panel. Large differences were observed between reviewers in assigning objects as CTCs urging the need for computer recognition of CTCs. A demonstration of a deep learning approach on the 100 images showed the promise of this technique for future CTC enumeration. © 2018 The Authors. Cytometry Part A published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Advancement of Cytometry.

Reviews on circulating biomarkers in breast cancer usually focus on one single biomarker or a selective group of biomarkers. An overview summarizing the discovery and evaluation of all blood-based biomarkers in metastatic breast cancer is lacking. This systematic review aims to identify the available evidence of known blood-based biomarkers in metastatic breast cancer, regarding their clinical utility and state-of-the-art position in the validation process. The initial search yielded 1078 original studies, of which 420 were assessed for eligibility. A total of 320 studies were included in the final synthesis. A Development, Evaluation and Application Chart (DEAC) of all biomarkers was developed. Most studies focus on identifying new biomarkers and search for relations between these biomarkers and traditional molecular characteristics. Biomarkers are usually investigated in only one study (68.8%). Only 9.8% of all biomarkers was investigated in more than five studies. Circulating tumor cells, gene expression within tumor cells and the concentration of secreted proteins are the most frequently investigated biomarkers in liquid biopsies. However, there is a lack of studies focusing on identifying the clinical utility of these biomarkers, by which the additional value still seems to be limited according to the investigated evidence.

Liquid biopsies (LBs) are referred to as the sampling and analysis of non-solid tissue, primarily blood, as a diagnostic and monitoring tool for cancer. Because LBs are largely non-invasive, they are a less-costly alternative for serial analysis of tumor progression and heterogeneity to facilitate clinical management. Although a variety of tumor markers are proposed (e.g., free-circulating DNA), the clinical evidence for Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs) is currently the most developed. Areas covered: This paper presents a health economic perspective of LBs in cancer management. We first briefly introduce the requirements in biomarker development and validation, illustrated for CTCs. Second, we discuss the state-of-art on the clinical utility of LBs in breast cancer in more detail. We conclude with a future perspective on the clinical use and reimbursement of LBs Expert commentary: A significant increase in clinical research on LBs can be observed and the results suggest a rapid change of cancer management. In addition to studies evaluating clinical utility of LBs, a smooth translation into clinical practice requires systematic assessment of the health economic benefits. This paper argues that (early stage) health economic research is required to facilitate its clinical use and to prioritize further evidence development.

Purpose The estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR), and HER2 status are essential in guiding treatment decisions in breast cancer patients. In daily life, the ER/PR/HER2 status is expected to be commonly tested twice, i.e., at diagnosis using material from tumor needle biopsies, and after tumor resection using full tumor tissue material. This study explored the discordance of ER/PR/HER2 between tumor needle biopsies and full tumor resection material using real-world patient-level data from Dutch breast cancer patients. Methods Pathology reports of 11,054 breast cancer patients were derived from PALGA (Dutch Pathology Registry). Discordance was calculated for multiple combinations of the ER/PR/HER2 receptor status. The influence of patient and tumor characteristics on the probability of having discordant test results was analyzed using multiple logistic regression models (separately for ER, PR and HER2). Results For 1279 patients (14.4%), at least one of the receptors (ER/PR/HER2) was determined on both biopsy and tumor tissue material. The majority had concordant test results for ER ( n = 916; 94.8%), PR ( n = 1170; 86.7%), and HER2 ( n = 881; 98.1%). Patients having an ER- and HER2-positive but PR-negative biopsy classification, BR grade III, and < 10% tumor tissue remaining after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) have the highest probability of ER discordant test results (OR 4.991; p = 83.31%). The probability of discordance in PR is based on different sets of patient and tumor characteristics. Potential cost savings from omitting multiple tests if concordance can be perfectly predicted can be up to €205,000 yearly. Conclusions Double testing of ER/PR/HER2 is less common than expected. Discordance in ER/PR/HER2 test results between tumor needle biopsy taken at the time of diagnosis and tumor resection material is very low, especially in patients not receiving any form of neoadjuvant therapy. These results imply that a substantial number of tests can potentially be omitted in specific subgroups of breast cancer patients.