Economic Evaluation of Watch and Wait for Rectal Cancer
Author Information
Author(s): Murshed Ishraq, Bunjo Zachary, Seow Warren, Murshed Ishmam, Bedrikovetski Sergei, Thomas Michelle, Sammour Tarik
Primary Institution: University of Adelaide
Hypothesis
This systematic review seeks to identify the economic impact of watch and wait compared with standard care in patients achieving a complete clinical response following neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer.
Conclusion
Watch and wait is likely to be cost effective and cost saving compared with standard care following complete clinical response in locally advanced rectal cancer.
Supporting Evidence
- Watch and wait showed consistent cost effectiveness and cost saving compared with surgery.
- The economic evaluations included studies from eight countries.
- The majority of studies reported lower costs and higher quality-adjusted life years for watch and wait.
Takeaway
The study found that not having surgery after treatment for rectal cancer can save money and still keep patients healthy.
Methodology
A systematic review of economic evaluations comparing watch and wait with standard care, including a search of multiple databases and assessment of reporting quality.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to reliance on similar input parameters across multiple studies.
Limitations
The studies included varied in methodological quality and reporting standards, and none comprehensively assessed societal costs.
Participant Demographics
Participants were adult patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy.
Statistical Information
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website