Skip to main content

Table 2 Main characteristics of the included studies

From: Systematic review of economic evaluations on stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) compared to other radiotherapy techniques or surgical procedures for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer

Study

Country

Type of study

Study design

Perspective

Type of treatment

Strategies compared

Main results (costs adjusted to 2021 US dollars)

CHEERS properly reported items

Potential conflicts of interest

Grutters et al., 2010 [37]

The Netherlands

CUA

Model-based

Health care payer

Radiotherapy

Inoperable stage I NSCLC:

Carbon-ion

Proton therapy

CRT

SABR

Operable stage I NSCLC:

Carbon-ion

Proton therapy

SABR

Inoperable stage I NSCLC:

SABR dominated proton therapy and CRT

Carbon-ion was not cost-effective compared to SABR: ICER $100,081/QALY

Operable stage I NSCLC:

SABR dominated other techniques

63%

Yes

Sher; Wee; Punglia, 2011 [32]

United States

CUA

Model-based

Health care payer

Radiotherapy

CRT

SABR

RFA

SABR was cost-effective compared to 3D-CRT: ICER $7,393/ QALY

SABR was cost-effective compared to RFA: ICER $17,375/QALY

50%

No

Puri et al., 2012 [31]

United States

CEA

Model-based

Health care payer

Radiotherapy and surgery

Surgical intervention

SABR

Surgical intervention was cost-effective compared to SABR: ICER $9,444/LYG

29%

No

Shah et al., 2013 [34]

United States

CUA

Model-based

Health care payer

Radiotherapy and surgery

MOP:

SABR

Wedge resection

COP:

SABR

Lobectomy

MOP:

SABR dominated wedge resection

COP:

lobectomy was cost-effective compared to SABR: ICER $15,472/QALY

50%

No

Louie et al., 2014 [35]

Canada

CUA

Model-based

Health care payer

Radiotherapy and surgery

CRT

SABR

Sublobar resection

Lobectomy

Pneumonectomy

BSC

SABR dominated CRT, sublobar resection, and BSC

Lobectomy was cost effective compared to SABR: ICER $52,149/ QALY

33%

Yes

Mitera et al., 2014 [35]

Canada

CEA

Single study-based

Health care payer / Hospital

Radiotherapy

CRT

SABR

SABR was cost-effective compared to CFRT:

ICER $1,110/LYG*. $934/LYG**

42%

Yes

Smith et al., 2015 [33]

United States

CEA

Single study-based

Health care payer

Radiotherapy and surgery

SABR

Sublobar resection

Lobectomy

Sublobar resection was not cost-effective compared to SABR: ICER $51,585/LYG

Lobectomy was cost-effective compared to SABR: ICER $32,345/ LYG

33%

Yes

Paix et al., 2018 [39]

France

CUA

Model-based

Health care payer

Radiotherapy and surgery

SABR

Lobectomy

SABR dominated lobectomy

67%

No

Wolff et al., 2020 [39]

The Netherlands

CUA

Model-based

Health care payer

Radiotherapy and surgery

VATS resection

SABR

SABR dominated VATS resection

54%

Yes

  1. BSC: Best supportive care, CEA: Cost-effectiveness analysis, CHEERS: Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards, COP: clearly operable patients, CRT: Conventional radiotherapy, CUA: Cost-utility analysis, ICER: incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, LYG: life years gained, MOP: Marginally operable patients, NSCLC: Non-small cell lung cancer, SABR: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy, VATS: Video Assisted Thoracic Surgery
  2. *Healthcare payer perspective, **Hospital perspective