Two-year and lifetime cost-effectiveness of intensity modulated radiation therapy versus 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy for head-and-neck cancer.

Purpose: To assess the cost-effectiveness of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) versus 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in the treatment of head-and neck-cancer (HNC).

Methods And Materials: We used a Markov model to simulate radiation therapy-induced xerostomia and dysphagia in a hypothetical cohort of 65-year-old HNC patients. Model input parameters were derived from PARSPORT (CRUK/03/005) patient-level trial data and quality-of-life and Medicare cost data from published literature. We calculated average incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from the US health care perspective as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and compared our ICERs with current cost-effectiveness standards whereby treatment comparators less than $50,000 per QALY gained are considered cost-effective.

Results: In the first 2 years after initial treatment, IMRT is not cost-effective compared with 3D-CRT, given an average ICER of $101,100 per QALY gained. However, over 15 years (remaining lifetime on the basis of average life expectancy of a 65-year-old), IMRT is more cost-effective at $34,523 per QALY gained.

Conclusion: Although HNC patients receiving IMRT will likely experience reduced xerostomia and dysphagia symptoms, the small quality-of-life benefit associated with IMRT is not cost-effective in the short term but may be cost-effective over a patient's lifetime, assuming benefits persist over time and patients are healthy and likely to live for a sustained period. Additional data quantifying the long-term benefits of IMRT, however, are needed.