Sara-Lise Busschaert MSc , Eva Kimpe MSc , Thierry Gevaert PhD , Mark De Ridder PhD, MD , Koen Putman PhD
{"title":"左侧乳房放疗中的深吸气屏气法","authors":"Sara-Lise Busschaert MSc , Eva Kimpe MSc , Thierry Gevaert PhD , Mark De Ridder PhD, MD , Koen Putman PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jaccao.2024.04.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) is an effective technique for reducing heart exposure during radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer. Despite its benefits, cost considerations and its impact on workflow remain significant barriers to widespread adoption.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of DIBH and compare its operational, financial, and clinical outcomes with free breathing (FB) in breast cancer treatment.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Treatment plans for 100 patients with left-sided breast cancer were generated using both DIBH and FB techniques. Dosimetric data, including the average mean heart dose, were calculated for each technique and used to estimate the cardiotoxicity of radiotherapy. A state-transition microsimulation model based on SCORE2 (Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation) algorithms projected the effects of DIBH on cardiovascular outcomes and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were calculated from a provider perspective using time-driven activity-based costing, applying a willingness-to-pay threshold of €40,000 for cost-effectiveness assessment. A discrete event simulation model assessed the impacts of DIBH vs FB on throughput and waiting times in the radiotherapy workflow.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In the base case scenario, DIBH was associated with an absolute risk reduction of 1.72% (95% CI: 1.67%-1.76%) in total cardiovascular events and 0.69% (95% CI: 0.67%-0.72%) in fatal cardiovascular events over 20 years. Additionally, DIBH was estimated to provide an incremental 0.04 QALYs (95% CI: 0.05-0.05) per left-sided breast cancer patient over the same time period. However, DIBH increased treatment times, reducing maximum achievable throughput by 12.48% (95% CI: 12.36%-12.75%) and increasing costs by €617 per left-sided breast cancer patient (95% CI: €615-€619). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €14,023 per QALY.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Despite time investments, DIBH is cost-effective in the Belgian population. The growing adoption of DIBH may benefit long-term cardiovascular health in breast cancer survivors.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48499,"journal":{"name":"Jacc: Cardiooncology","volume":"6 4","pages":"Pages 514-525"},"PeriodicalIF":12.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666087324002059/pdfft?md5=ef3a028ea334721f506bbe0608f82cfc&pid=1-s2.0-S2666087324002059-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deep Inspiration Breath Hold in Left-Sided Breast Radiotherapy\",\"authors\":\"Sara-Lise Busschaert MSc , Eva Kimpe MSc , Thierry Gevaert PhD , Mark De Ridder PhD, MD , Koen Putman PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jaccao.2024.04.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) is an effective technique for reducing heart exposure during radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer. Despite its benefits, cost considerations and its impact on workflow remain significant barriers to widespread adoption.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of DIBH and compare its operational, financial, and clinical outcomes with free breathing (FB) in breast cancer treatment.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Treatment plans for 100 patients with left-sided breast cancer were generated using both DIBH and FB techniques. Dosimetric data, including the average mean heart dose, were calculated for each technique and used to estimate the cardiotoxicity of radiotherapy. A state-transition microsimulation model based on SCORE2 (Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation) algorithms projected the effects of DIBH on cardiovascular outcomes and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were calculated from a provider perspective using time-driven activity-based costing, applying a willingness-to-pay threshold of €40,000 for cost-effectiveness assessment. A discrete event simulation model assessed the impacts of DIBH vs FB on throughput and waiting times in the radiotherapy workflow.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In the base case scenario, DIBH was associated with an absolute risk reduction of 1.72% (95% CI: 1.67%-1.76%) in total cardiovascular events and 0.69% (95% CI: 0.67%-0.72%) in fatal cardiovascular events over 20 years. Additionally, DIBH was estimated to provide an incremental 0.04 QALYs (95% CI: 0.05-0.05) per left-sided breast cancer patient over the same time period. However, DIBH increased treatment times, reducing maximum achievable throughput by 12.48% (95% CI: 12.36%-12.75%) and increasing costs by €617 per left-sided breast cancer patient (95% CI: €615-€619). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €14,023 per QALY.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Despite time investments, DIBH is cost-effective in the Belgian population. The growing adoption of DIBH may benefit long-term cardiovascular health in breast cancer survivors.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48499,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jacc: Cardiooncology\",\"volume\":\"6 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 514-525\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666087324002059/pdfft?md5=ef3a028ea334721f506bbe0608f82cfc&pid=1-s2.0-S2666087324002059-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jacc: Cardiooncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666087324002059\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jacc: Cardiooncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666087324002059","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Deep Inspiration Breath Hold in Left-Sided Breast Radiotherapy
Background
Deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) is an effective technique for reducing heart exposure during radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer. Despite its benefits, cost considerations and its impact on workflow remain significant barriers to widespread adoption.
Objectives
This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of DIBH and compare its operational, financial, and clinical outcomes with free breathing (FB) in breast cancer treatment.
Methods
Treatment plans for 100 patients with left-sided breast cancer were generated using both DIBH and FB techniques. Dosimetric data, including the average mean heart dose, were calculated for each technique and used to estimate the cardiotoxicity of radiotherapy. A state-transition microsimulation model based on SCORE2 (Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation) algorithms projected the effects of DIBH on cardiovascular outcomes and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were calculated from a provider perspective using time-driven activity-based costing, applying a willingness-to-pay threshold of €40,000 for cost-effectiveness assessment. A discrete event simulation model assessed the impacts of DIBH vs FB on throughput and waiting times in the radiotherapy workflow.
Results
In the base case scenario, DIBH was associated with an absolute risk reduction of 1.72% (95% CI: 1.67%-1.76%) in total cardiovascular events and 0.69% (95% CI: 0.67%-0.72%) in fatal cardiovascular events over 20 years. Additionally, DIBH was estimated to provide an incremental 0.04 QALYs (95% CI: 0.05-0.05) per left-sided breast cancer patient over the same time period. However, DIBH increased treatment times, reducing maximum achievable throughput by 12.48% (95% CI: 12.36%-12.75%) and increasing costs by €617 per left-sided breast cancer patient (95% CI: €615-€619). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €14,023 per QALY.
Conclusions
Despite time investments, DIBH is cost-effective in the Belgian population. The growing adoption of DIBH may benefit long-term cardiovascular health in breast cancer survivors.
期刊介绍：
JACC: CardioOncology is a specialized journal that belongs to the esteemed Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) family. Its purpose is to enhance cardiovascular care for cancer patients by publishing high-quality, innovative scientific research and sharing evidence-based knowledge.
The journal aims to revolutionize the field of cardio-oncology and actively involve and educate professionals in both cardiovascular and oncology fields. It covers a wide range of topics including pre-clinical, translational, and clinical research, as well as best practices in cardio-oncology. Key areas of focus include understanding disease mechanisms, utilizing in vitro and in vivo models, exploring novel and traditional therapeutics (across Phase I-IV trials), studying epidemiology, employing precision medicine, and investigating primary and secondary prevention.
Amyloidosis, cardiovascular risk factors, heart failure, and vascular disease are some examples of the disease states that are of particular interest to the journal. However, it welcomes research on other relevant conditions as well.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
