A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Neuroendocrine Cervical Tumors

Abstract Purpose. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy in combination with surgery and adjuvant therapy compared with either surgery alone or surgery plus adjuvant therapy for the treatment of neuroendocrine cervical tumors (NETs). Materials and methods. A single-institution retrospective analysis of 107 patients with NETs was performed based on the new International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO 2018) staging system. We divided the patients who underwent radical surgery into two groups: neoadjuvant therapy (NACT) and non-neoadjuvant therapy (non-NACT) groups. We performed subgroup analysis of overall survival and cost-effectiveness by dividing the patients with stage I-IV disease into four subgroups. An assessment was constructed to reflect the costs and effectiveness of the treatment from the perspectives of both clinical practice and health economics.Results. The NACT group had -0.45 life-years (LYs) at an incremental cost of $15197.58, compared with the non-NACT group, which means that it is not cost-effective. However, subgroup analysis of patients with stage II disease showed that the NACT group had significantly better overall survival time than the non-NACT group (median overall survival had not been reached versus 29.23 months, p＜0.001). The NACT group had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $5921.43/LY compared with the non-NACT group for stage II disease. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold reached $31118.29/LY, which is nearly three times China's per capita GDP 2020, the probability of NACT being cost-effective was 97% versus non-NACT group in the treatment of stage II neuroendocrine tumors of the uterine cervix. Conclusion. NACT is not a cost-effective treatment strategy compared with non-NACT in the treatment of NETs, but may be a cost-effective treatment option for stage II NETs.