Cost-effectiveness analysis of FDG PET-CT in the management of pulmonary metastases from malignant melanoma

Krug, Bruno; Crott, Ralph; Roch‐Jeune, Isabelle; Lonneux, Max; Beguin, Claire; Baurain, Jean‐François; Pirson, Anne-Sophie; Borght, Thierry Vander

doi:10.3109/02841860903440254

Cited by 39 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One study was found screening the references [6] and 18 articles were subsequently excluded [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] . Finally, 16 studies were included [6,[25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] . The characteristics of the included studies (Table 1) and a list of excluded studies on economic evaluation assessment, with reasons for exclusion (Table 2) are provided.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Krug et al [37] showed that PET/CT strategy was cost-effective in restaging of patients with suspected pulmonary metastases of melanoma. Wallace et al [38] demonstrated that initial PET and EUS-FNA staging were more effective but also more expensive than other imaging strategies in oesophagus cancer.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Krug et al [37] performed a cost-effectiveness analysis, using a Markov model over a 10-year-period, to compare two different surveillance programs, either PET/CT or whole-body CT, in patients with suspected pulmonary metastasized melanoma. The Belgian health care payer perspective was adopted.…”

Section: Cost-effectiveness Of Fdg-pet or Pet/ct In Melanomamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cost-effectiveness of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in tumours other than lung cancer: A systematic review

Annunziata

Caldarella

Treglia

2014

WJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM:To systematically review published data on the cost-effectiveness of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) or PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) in tumours other than lung cancer. METHODS:A comprehensive literature search of studies published in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Embase databases through the 10 th of October in 2013 was carried out. A search algorithm based on a combination of the terms: (1) "PET" or " PET/computed tomography (PET/CT)" or "positron emission tomography"; and (2) "cost-effectiveness" or "cost-utility" or "cost-efficacy" or "technology assessment" or "health technology assessment" was used. Only cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses in English language were included. Exclusion criteria were: (1) articles not within the field of interest of this review; (2) review articles, editorials or letters, conference proceedings; and (3) outcome evaluation studies, cost studies or health technology assessment reports. For each included study, information was collected concerning basic study, type of tumours evaluated, perspective/type of study, results, unit and comparison alternatives. RESULTS:Sixteen studies were included. Head and neck tumours were evaluated in 4 articles, lymphoma in 4, colon-rectum tumours in 3 and breast tumours in 2. Only one article was retrieved for melanoma, oesophagus and ovary tumours. Cost-effectiveness results of FDG-PET or PET/CT ranged from dominated to dominant. CONCLUSION:Literature evidence about the costeffectiveness of FDG-PET or PET/CT in tumours other than lung cancer is still limited. Nevertheless, FDG-PET or PET/CT seems to be cost-effective in selective indications in oncology (staging and restaging of head and neck tumours, staging and treatment evaluation in lymphoma).

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cost-effectiveness of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in tumours other than lung cancer: A systematic review

Annunziata

Caldarella

Treglia

2014

WJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite being the standard of care, there has been uncertainty about whether or not improved diagnostic accuracy translates into improved management of patients. The strongest evidence for the cost-effectiveness of PET is still in the staging of non-small cell lung cancer, but a recently performed analysis of FDG PET in oncology found only four studies (Mansueto et al, 2009, Lejeune et al, 2005, Krug et al, 2010, Yen et al, 2009) that based their findings explicitly on PET/CT (Langer, 2010). The following overview tries to suggest clinical setting where growing evidence exists that the initial use of a diagnostic CT or if no access to hybrid imaging is possible, image fusion between CT and PET has to be aspired.…”

Section: Oncologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Integrating PET-CT in the management of patients with high risk MM appears to be less costly and more accurate by avoiding futile thoracotomies in one of five patients as well as by providing a small survival benefit at 10 years (Krug et al, 2010).…”

Section: Melanomamentioning

confidence: 99%