Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich. mehr Informationen...
The Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Allogeneic Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation versus Bone Marrow Transplantation in Pediatric Patients with Acute Leukemia
Ist Teil von
Biology of blood and marrow transplantation, 2010-09, Vol.16 (9), p.1272-1281
Ort / Verlag
United States: Elsevier Inc
Erscheinungsjahr
2010
Quelle
MEDLINE
Beschreibungen/Notizen
In a retrospective study, we evaluated the cost and cost-effectiveness of allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) (n = 30) compared with bone marrow transplantation (BMT) (n = 110) in children with acute leukemia after 1 year of follow-up. Treatment success was defined as disease-free survival at 1 year posttransplantation. For patients at standard risk for disease, the treatment success rate was 57.1% for PBSCT recipients and 80.3% for BMT recipients ( P = not significant [NS]). The average total cost per treatment success at 1 year in the standard-risk disease group was $512,294 for PBSCT recipients and $352,885 for BMT recipients ( P = NS). For patients with high-risk disease, the treatment success rate was 18.8% for PBSCT recipients and 23.5% for BMT recipients ( P = NS). The cumulative average cost was $457,078 in BMT recipients and $377,316 in PBSCT recipients ( P = NS). Point estimates of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) indicate that in patients with standard-risk disease, allogeneic BMT had lower costs and greater effectiveness than PBSCT (ICER, -$687,108; 95% confidence interval [CI], $2.4 million to dominated). For patients with high-risk disease, BMT was more effective and more costly, and it had an ICER of $1.69 million (95% CI, $29.7 million to dominated) per additional treatment success. The comparative economic evaluation provides support for BMT in standard-risk patients, but much uncertainty precludes a clear advantage of either treatment option in patients with high-risk disease. More studies using larger and randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the long-term cost-effectiveness of each procedure.