KRAS and BRAF mutation screening in metastatic colorectal cancer costly in relation to benefits
Thursday, November 29, 2012Researchers report that screening for KRAS and BRAF mutations can reduce the cost of anti-EGFR treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer but with a very small reduction in overall survival according to a new study published on November 28 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
Metastatic colorectal cancer patients whose tumors harbor mutations in KRAS (and to a lesser extent, in BRAF) are unlikely to respond to costly anti-EGFR therapies. Screening of patients who are candidates for these therapies for mutations in one of these genes (KRAS) has been recommended, with the goal of providing treatment to those who are likely to benefit from it while avoiding unnecessary costs and harm to those who are not likely to benefit. However, the real-world impact of mutation screening for both KRAS and BRAF is unclear.
To better understand the impact of mutation screening with regard to health outcomes, costs, and value, Ajay S. Behl, Ph.D., M.B.A., of the HealthPartners Research Foundation in Bloomington, Minnesota, and colleagues, performed a cost-effectiveness analysis that took into account the treatments, resection of metastases, and survival for the different types of metastases. They conducted patient-level decision analytic simulation modeling comparing four strategies involving KRAS and BRAF mutation testing to select treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer patients: no anti-EGFR therapy (best supportive care); anti-EGFR therapy without screening; screening for KRAS mutations only (before providing anti-EGFR therapy); and screening for KRAS and BRAF mutations (before providing anti-EGFR therapy).
The researchers found that compared with no anti-EGFR therapy, screening for both KRAS and BRAF mutations showed a very high (ie, unfavorable) incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, meaning it was very costly in relation to its benefits. Compared with anti-EGFR therapy without screening, screening for KRAS mutations saved approximately $7,500 per patient; adding BRAF mutation screening saved another $1023, with little reduction in expected survival.
The authors write, "In general, our results are less supportive of the use of anti-EGFR therapy than previous analyses, and they indicate lower cost savings from KRAS testing than previously reported. Although we cannot confirm that anti-EGFR therapy is a cost-effective use of health care resources, we can affirm that KRAS testing is cost-saving. BRAF testing may offer additional savings."
In an accompanying editorial, Josh J. Carlson, M.P.H., Ph.D., of the Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, and Scott D. Ramsey, MD, PhD, of the Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, both in Seattle, note two practical points highlighted by the study: that molecular testing is as much about generating cost savings by identifying nonresponders as it is about improving survival by identifying responders, and that good modeling must account for the fact that community practice (as opposed to clinical trials) "is messy." They write, "most importantly, this study of an unusually accurate test raises important issues that should be considered for other molecular tests in other settings."
###
Journal of the National Cancer Institute: http://jncicancerspectrum.oupjournals.org
Thanks to Journal of the National Cancer Institute for this article.
This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.
This press release has been viewed 63 time(s).
kelis dick clark dies ibogaine jamie moyer bone cancer hossa the cell
The first?Our Bodies, Ourselves?was?written for us in the early 70s. It was a landmark book that helped fuel the women?s liberation movement with its frank discussion of a woman?s body. The publishers, the?Boston Women?s Health Book Collective, caught up to us again six years ago with this edition on Menopause, which I find equally progressive. They cover the basics of Menopause (?What?s Happening in Our Bodies?), which I think women just entering the perimenopausal phase will find particularly helpful.
The Smart Woman?s Guide to Midlife and Beyond: The No-nonsense Approach to Staying Healthy After 50,? is authored by Drs. Janet Horn, a gynecologist and Robin Miller, an internist who specializes in integrative medicine.? They?re both in their 50s and have been friends since their med school days, so their close rapport is reflected in the way they provide information and advice. They talk about their own experiences, share patient stories and conclude each chapter with a ?chat? that makes you feel that you?re among friends who are dealing with the same mid-life changes as you.
?is chock full of information about the mid-life transition beginning
with a thorough explanation of the initial, peri-menopausal phase. It?s written by? Kate Bracy Kalb RN, a women?s health care practitioner, with a technical review by a gynecologist,?Kathryn Arendt, MD.? It?s quite extensive, but well organized and easy to read. I?d bet that whatever question you have about the changes you?re experiencing will be answered in these pages.
?to my younger friends in the sputtering stage of menopause (aka perimenopause), who don?t have a clue about what?s happening to their bodies or what to expect in the years ahead. The author covers a lot of ground ? from HRT and hot flashes to memory lapses and vaginal dryness ? in an intimate, girlfriend-to-girlfriend voice that makes this book instructive and engaging.
.?It?s an important book that, besides the basics, covers weighty issues such as the medicalization of menopause, understanding research when it comes to prevention and risk of disease and women?s cancers.
'; $("#SiteLoginDiv").html(statusLoginStr); $("#SiteLoginDiv").show(); $("#CommonLoginDiv").hide(); //-To Show the Twitter Post Box T("#maincommentdivfortweeter").tweetBox({ height: 100, width: 600, defaultContent: "http://toi.in/4CKAPZ", onTweet : function (data){ //--------------Function to Post data to the insert2dbfile var whihcflag = $("#whichcontype").val(); var first_name = $("#first_name").val(); var last_name = $("#second_name").val(); var screenName = $("#userscreenname").val(); var profile_url = $("#userprofilelink").val(); var profileImage = $("#userprofileimage").val(); var loginusertypeid = $("#loginusertypeid").val(); var comment_text = data.replace("http://toi.in/4CKAPZ",""); var comment_parentid = $("#comment_parentid").val(); var content_id = $("#content_id").val(); $.post("http://healthmeup.com/2db/comment2db.php",{'login_type':'twitter','whihcflag':whihcflag,'first_name':first_name,'last_name':last_name,'screenName':screenName,'profile_url':profile_url,'profileImage':profileImage,'loginusertypeid':loginusertypeid,'comment_text':comment_text,"content_id":content_id,"comment_parentid":comment_parentid},function(data){ if(jQuery.trim(data)=='error'){ $("#showerrorComment").html('User and password did not match.'); document.getElementById('showerrorComment').style.display="block"; }else if(jQuery.trim(data)=='BadWord'){ $("#comment_text").focus(); $("#commentBoxRes").html('Whoa... STOP right there! Pls feed us love, not spam, links or abusive words :) Help us keep Healthmeup a happy place!'); document.getElementById('commentBoxRes').style.display="block"; }else{ $("#commentBoxRes").show(); $.post("http://healthmeup.com/tpl/tplGetcommentadded.php",{"content_id":content_id,"pageval":"1","whichflag":whihcflag},function(data){ $("#showcommentcontent").html(data); var nocomments = $('#nocomments_'+17761).val(); //console.debug(nocomments); if( nocomments > 0){ $('#comment_'+17761).html(''); $('#comment_'+17761).html(''+nocomments +' Comments ' ); } }); } }); } }); //$("#login-logout").append('
