Table 4 Simulation outcomes for the standard work-up, FES-PET/CT and FDG-PET/CT strategies for a follow-up period of 5 years with 10 sets of data for 5073 women for 20 simulation rounds

From: The value of PET/CT with FES or FDG tracers in metastatic breast cancer: a computer simulation study in ER-positive patients

 

Standard

FES-PET/CT

FDG-PET/CT

 

Work-up (mean±s.d.)

Strategy (mean±s.d.)

Strategy (mean±s.d.)

Initial imaging tests

963.19±60.0

1030.5±39.5

493.5±28.7

Staging tests

165.4±12.5

0.0±0.0

0.0±0.0

Biopsy tests

188.4±14.3

114.7±14.7

260.4±21.5

MBCs found

94.7±8.9

107.0±10.5

91.2±8.8

False-positive tests

103.9±24.4

43.1±8.0

76.4±14.8

Total costs × ɛ1000

232±15

1124±43

652±35

Additional costs × ɛ1000

NA

892±45

420±38

Saved biopsies

NA

73.7±20.5

(-71.9±14.8)

ICER × ɛ1000

NA

12.1±3.4

(-5.8±2.2)a

  1. Abbreviations: CT=computed tomography; ER=oestrogen receptor; FDG=2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose; FES=16α-[18F]fluoro-17β-oestradiol; ICER=incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; MBC=metastatic breast cancer; MRI=magnetic resonance imaging; PET=positron emission tomography.
  2. aThe ICER of the FDG-PET/CT over the standard work-up per avoided biopsy was negative as the costs were higher and there were no avoided biopsies (i.e., the health effect was negative).
Back to article page