Cost-effectiveness of radiotherapy during surgery compared with external radiation therapy in the treatment of women with breast cancer

Introduction: Intraoperative radiation therapy device (IORT) is one of the several options for partial breast irradiation. IORT is sent to the tumor bed during surgery and can be replaced with conventional standard therapy (EBRT). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of IORT machine compared with EBRT and to determine the dominant option in terms of the cost-effectiveness. Method: This study was conducted in two phases; the first phase was a comprehensive review of the electronic databases search that was extracted after extraction and selection of the articles used in this article on effectiveness outcomes. Data collection form was completed by professionals and experts to estimate the cost of treatment, intraoperative radiotherapy and radiotherapy cost when using external radiation therapy process; direct costs were considered from the perspective of service provider and they were calculated in the second phase to determine the option of cost-effective ICER. Excel software was used for data analysis and sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the strength of the results of cost-effectiveness. Results:18 studies were selected but only 8 of them were shown to have acceptable quality. The consequences like “rate of cancer recurrence”, “seroma”, “necrosis”, “toxic”, “skin disorders and delayed wound healing” and “spread the pain” were among the consequences used in the selected articles. The total costs for each patient during a course of treatment for EBRT and IORT were estimated 1398 and $5337.5, respectively. During the analysis, cost-effectiveness of the consequences of cancer recurrence, seroma, necrosis and skin disorders and delayed wound healing ICER was calculated. And IORT was found to be the dominant supplier in all cases. Also, in terms of implications of toxicity and prevalence of pain, IORT had a lower cost and better effectiveness and consequently the result was more cost effective than EBRT. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, the difference between the two devices in terms of effectiveness was much lesser than that in terms of the cost of the two devices. According to the results of IORT machine, it is the dominant supplier compared with EBRT. From the cost-effectiveness perspective, Iran Ministry of Health can consider IORT system as an option for entering Iranian health system. But the ethical and cultural considerations in the use of the device must be taken into account.