IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uteexx/v64y2019i4p368-386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness of patient-specific motion management strategy in lung cancer radiation therapy planning

Author

Listed:
  • Shan Liu
  • Shouyi Wang
  • W. Art Chaovalitwongse
  • Stephen R. Bowen

Abstract

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in medicine is a form of economic study that compares the relative value of medical technologies and health care services. It helps decision makers to formally evaluate proposed interventions and make informed choices based on the estimated health gains per dollar spent under each intervention. This study employs a CEA framework to assess an emerging imaging technology to determine whether its adoption will be appropriate in routine patient care. A significant challenge in lung cancer radiotherapy (RT) is respiration-induced tumor motion during positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT). Respiratory gating may improve the image quality and delivery of curative doses to tumor. Respiratory-gated PET/CT is especially useful for locally advanced and inoperable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Due to the heterogeneity in patients’ respiratory patterns, questions remain regarding who will benefit from respiratory gating. The effectiveness of respiratory gating can be measured by using quantitative improvements in PET/CT images. We previously developed a patient-specific motion management (PSMM) paradigm to identify patients who benefited from respiratory-gated PET/CT based on respiratory pattern analysis. This article presents a new CEA framework to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PSMM compared to the population-based radiation oncology practice of motion management in more than 1,500 cancer patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Shan Liu & Shouyi Wang & W. Art Chaovalitwongse & Stephen R. Bowen, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness of patient-specific motion management strategy in lung cancer radiation therapy planning," The Engineering Economist, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(4), pages 368-386, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:uteexx:v:64:y:2019:i:4:p:368-386
    DOI: 10.1080/0013791X.2019.1597239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0013791X.2019.1597239
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0013791X.2019.1597239?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:uteexx:v:64:y:2019:i:4:p:368-386. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UTEE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.