Cost-Effectiveness of Real-World Administration of Concomitant Viscum album L. Therapy for the Treatment of Stage IV Pancreatic Cancer

Anja Thronicke; Thomas Reinhold; Philipp von Trott; Harald Matthes; Friedemann Schad

doi:10.1155/2020/3543568

Cost-Effectiveness of Real-World Administration of Concomitant Viscum album L. Therapy for the Treatment of Stage IV Pancreatic Cancer

Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2020 Mar 12:2020:3543568. doi: 10.1155/2020/3543568. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Anja Thronicke¹, Thomas Reinhold², Philipp von Trott³, Harald Matthes^{1

3

4}, Friedemann Schad^{1

4}

Affiliations

¹ Research Institute Havelhöhe, Kladower Damm 221, 14089 Berlin, Germany.
² Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
³ Oncological and Palliative Care Centre, Hospital Gemeinschaftskrankenhaus Havelhöhe, Kladower Damm 221, 14089 Berlin, Germany.
⁴ Medical Clinic for Gastroenterology, Infectiology and Rheumatology CBF, Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

Abstract

Background: For patients receiving add-on Viscum album L. (VA) treatments for late-stage pancreatic cancer, an improved overall survival (OS) was observed. Only limited information regarding cost-effectiveness (CE) for comparisons between standard of care and standard of care plus add-on VA in stage IV pancreatic cancer treatment is available. The present study assessed the costs and cost-effectiveness of standard of care plus VA (V) compared to standard of care alone (C) for a hospital in Germany.

Methods: An observational study was conducted using data from the Network Oncology clinical registry. Patients included had stage IV pancreatic cancer at diagnosis and received C or V treatment in a certified German Cancer Center. Cost and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) including the analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were performed from the hospital's perspective based on routine data from the financial controlling department and observed data on OS. The primary result of the analysis was tested for robustness in a bootstrap-based sensitivity analysis.

Results: 88 patients (C or n = 34; V treatment in a certified German Cancer Center. Cost and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) including the analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were performed from the hospital's perspective based on routine data from the financial controlling department and observed data on OS. The primary result of the analysis was tested for robustness in a bootstrap-based sensitivity analysis. n = 34; C or V treatment in a certified German Cancer Center. Cost and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) including the analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were performed from the hospital's perspective based on routine data from the financial controlling department and observed data on OS. The primary result of the analysis was tested for robustness in a bootstrap-based sensitivity analysis. V treatment in a certified German Cancer Center. Cost and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) including the analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were performed from the hospital's perspective based on routine data from the financial controlling department and observed data on OS. The primary result of the analysis was tested for robustness in a bootstrap-based sensitivity analysis. C or V treatment in a certified German Cancer Center. Cost and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) including the analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were performed from the hospital's perspective based on routine data from the financial controlling department and observed data on OS. The primary result of the analysis was tested for robustness in a bootstrap-based sensitivity analysis. C or V treatment in a certified German Cancer Center. Cost and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) including the analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were performed from the hospital's perspective based on routine data from the financial controlling department and observed data on OS. The primary result of the analysis was tested for robustness in a bootstrap-based sensitivity analysis. C or.

Conclusion: Based on this CEA analysis, from the hospital's point of view, the costs per mean month of OS and per mean hospital stay were lower for patients under combinational standard of care plus VA compared to patients receiving standard of care alone for the treatment of stage IV pancreatic cancer. Further prospective cost-effectiveness studies are mandatory to reevaluate our findings.