Cost effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery versus primary cytoreductive surgery for patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer during the initial treatment phase

Arthur Quan Tran*, Daniel O. Erim, Stephanie A. Sullivan, Ashley L. Cole, Emma L. Barber, Kenneth H. Kim, Paola A. Gehrig, Stephanie B. Wheeler

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Scopus citations


Objective: Advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) can be treated with either neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) or primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS). Although randomized controlled trials show that NACT is non-inferior in overall survival compared to PCS, there may be improvement in short-term morbidity. We sought to investigate the cost-effectiveness of NACT relative to PCS for AEOC from the US Medicare perspective. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov model with a 7-month time horizon comparing (1) 3 cycles of NACT with carboplatin and paclitaxel (CT), followed by interval cytoreductive surgery, then 3 additional cycles of CT, or (2) PCS followed by 6 cycles of CT. Input parameters included probability of chemotherapy complications, surgical complications, treatment completion, treatment costs, and utilities. Model outcomes included costs, life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), in terms of cost per life-year gained and cost per QALY gained. We accounted for differences in surgical complexity by incorporating the cost of additional procedures and the probability of undergoing those procedures. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed via Monte Carlo simulations. Results: NACT resulted in a savings of $7034 per patient with a 0.035 QALY increase compared to PCS; therefore, NACT dominated PCS in the base case analysis. With PSA, NACT was the dominant strategy more than 99% of the time. Conclusions: In the short-term, NACT is a cost-effective alternative compared to PCS in women with AEOC. These results may translate to longer term cost-effectiveness; however, data from randomized control trials continues to mature.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)329-335
Number of pages7
JournalGynecologic oncology
Issue number2
StatePublished - Feb 2018



  • Cost-effective analysis
  • Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
  • Ovarian cancer
  • Primary cytoreduction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this