Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the 70-gene signature compared with clinical assessment in breast cancer based on a randomised controlled trial

  • Valesca P Retèl*
  • , Danalyn Byng
  • , Sabine C Linn
  • , Katarzyna Jóźwiak
  • , Hendrik Koffijberg
  • , Emiel J Rutgers
  • , Fatima Cardoso
  • , Martine J Piccart
  • , Coralie Poncet
  • , Laura J Van't Veer
  • , Wim H van Harten
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • University of Twente
  • Utrecht University
  • The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital
  • Champalimaud Clinical Center/Champalimaud Foundation
  • Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory J.-C. Heuson
  • European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Data Center
  • University of California at San Francisco

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

21 Citations (Scopus)
24 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The clinical utility of the 70-gene signature (MammaPrint®) to guide chemotherapy use in T1-3N0-1M0 breast cancer was demonstrated in the Microarray in Node-Negative and 1 to 3 Positive Lymph Node Disease May Avoid Chemotherapy (MINDACT) study. One thousand four ninety seven of 3356 (46.2%) enrolled patients with high clinical risk (in accordance with the modified Adjuvant! Online clinical-pathological assessment) had a low-risk 70-gene signature. Using patient-level data from the MINDACT trial, the cost-effectiveness of using the 70-gene signature to guide adjuvant chemotherapy selection for clinical high risk, estrogen receptor positive (ER+), human epidermal growth factor 2 negative (HER2-) patients was analysed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: A hybrid decision tree-Markov model simulated treatment strategies in accordance with the 70-gene signature with clinical assessment versus clinical assessment alone, over a 10-year time horizon. Primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), country-specific costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for six countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Netherlands, UK and the US.

RESULTS: Treatment strategies guided by the 70-gene signature result in more QALYs compared with clinical assessment alone. Costs of the 70-gene signature strategy were lower in five of six countries. This led to dominance of the 70-gene signature in Belgium, France, Germany, Netherlands and the US and to a cost-effective situation in the UK (ICER £22,910/QALY). Annual national cost savings were €4.2M (Belgium), €24.7M (France), €45.1M (Germany), €12.7M (Netherlands) and $244M (US). UK budget increase was £8.4M.

CONCLUSION: Using the 70-gene signature to safely guide chemotherapy de-escalation in clinical high risk patients with ER+/HER2- tumours is cost-effective compared with using clinical assessment alone. Long-term follow-up and outcomes from the MINDACT trial are necessary to address uncertainties in model inputs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)193-203
Number of pages11
JournalEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)
Volume137
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2020
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cost-effectiveness analysis of the 70-gene signature compared with clinical assessment in breast cancer based on a randomised controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this