title: Treatment of advanced or recurrent cervical cancer with Cisplatin or Cisplatin containing regimens: a cost effective analysis.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Trials have demonstrated improvements in survival with adding paclitaxel (P) or topotecan (T) to cisplatin (C) for the treatment of advanced cervical cancer. We sought to evaluate the cost effectiveness of these regimens.
  
  
  METHODS
  A decision model was developed based on Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) protocols 169 and 179. Arm 1 is 6 cycles of cisplatin. Arm 2 is 6 cycles of CP while arm 3 is 6 cycles of CT. Parameters include overall survival (OS), cost and complications. Sensitivity analyses were performed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for C versus CP is $13,654/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. For CT compared to C, the ICER is $152,327/QALY. When compared simultaneously, CT is dominated. At a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000/QALY, C is the preferred option but CP is acceptable. Sensitivity analyses suggest that CT would become the preferred option if it was to improve OS to 24 months (compared to 9.4 months).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In this model, CP is an acceptable alternative to cisplatin for the treatment of these patients with an increase in cost of only $13,654/QALY. The addition of topotecan did not increase survival enough to justify the increased cost.
authors.affiliation: Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, Toledo, Ohio, USA.
authors.forename: John P
authors.initials: JP
authors.lastname: Geisler
authors.forename: Jayanth
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Swathirajan
authors.forename: Katherine L
authors.initials: KL
authors.lastname: Wood
authors.forename: Kelly J
authors.initials: KJ
authors.lastname: Manahan