Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention

Sarah E. Dilley, Laura J. Havrilesky, Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez, David E. Cohn, J. Michael Straughn, Aaron B. Caughey, Maria I. Rodriguez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives Data suggesting a link between the fallopian tube and ovarian cancer have led to an increase in rates of salpingectomy at the time of pelvic surgery, a practice known as opportunistic salpingectomy (OS). However, the potential benefits, risks and costs for this new practice are not well established. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of laparoscopic permanent contraception or hysterectomy for benign indications. Methods We created two models to compare the cost-effectiveness of salpingectomy versus usual care. The hypothetical study population is 50,000 women aged 45 undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation for benign indications, and 300,000 women aged 35 undergoing laparoscopic permanent contraception. SEER data were used for probabilities of ovarian cancer cases and deaths. The ovarian cancer risk reduction, complication rates, utilities and associated costs were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulation were performed, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to determine the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Results In the laparoscopic hysterectomy cohort, OS is cost saving and would yield $23.9 million in health care dollars saved. In the laparoscopic permanent contraception cohort, OS is cost-effective with an ICER of $31,432/QALY compared to tubal ligation, and remains cost-effective as long as it reduces ovarian cancer risk by 54%. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated cost-effectiveness with hysterectomy and permanent contraception in 62.3% and 55% of trials, respectively. Conclusions Opportunistic salpingectomy for low-risk women undergoing pelvic surgery may be a cost-effective strategy for decreasing ovarian cancer risk at time of hysterectomy or permanent contraception. In our model, salpingectomy was cost-effective with both procedures, but the advantage greater at time of hysterectomy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)373-379
Number of pages7
JournalGynecologic Oncology
Volume146
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2017

Fingerprint

Salpingectomy
Ovarian Neoplasms
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Hysterectomy
Contraception
Costs and Cost Analysis
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Fallopian Tube Neoplasms
Tubal Sterilization
Risk Reduction Behavior
Delivery of Health Care

Keywords

  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Ovarian cancer
  • Salpingectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Dilley, S. E., Havrilesky, L. J., Bakkum-Gamez, J. N., Cohn, D. E., Michael Straughn, J., Caughey, A. B., & Rodriguez, M. I. (2017). Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention. Gynecologic Oncology, 146(2), 373-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.034

Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention. / Dilley, Sarah E.; Havrilesky, Laura J.; Bakkum-Gamez, Jamie N; Cohn, David E.; Michael Straughn, J.; Caughey, Aaron B.; Rodriguez, Maria I.

In: Gynecologic Oncology, Vol. 146, No. 2, 01.08.2017, p. 373-379.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dilley, SE, Havrilesky, LJ, Bakkum-Gamez, JN, Cohn, DE, Michael Straughn, J, Caughey, AB & Rodriguez, MI 2017, 'Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention', Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 146, no. 2, pp. 373-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.034
Dilley, Sarah E. ; Havrilesky, Laura J. ; Bakkum-Gamez, Jamie N ; Cohn, David E. ; Michael Straughn, J. ; Caughey, Aaron B. ; Rodriguez, Maria I. / Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention. In: Gynecologic Oncology. 2017 ; Vol. 146, No. 2. pp. 373-379.
@article{38699e37ae7842f298346f7ae25ed5fc,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention",
abstract = "Objectives Data suggesting a link between the fallopian tube and ovarian cancer have led to an increase in rates of salpingectomy at the time of pelvic surgery, a practice known as opportunistic salpingectomy (OS). However, the potential benefits, risks and costs for this new practice are not well established. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of laparoscopic permanent contraception or hysterectomy for benign indications. Methods We created two models to compare the cost-effectiveness of salpingectomy versus usual care. The hypothetical study population is 50,000 women aged 45 undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation for benign indications, and 300,000 women aged 35 undergoing laparoscopic permanent contraception. SEER data were used for probabilities of ovarian cancer cases and deaths. The ovarian cancer risk reduction, complication rates, utilities and associated costs were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulation were performed, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to determine the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Results In the laparoscopic hysterectomy cohort, OS is cost saving and would yield $23.9 million in health care dollars saved. In the laparoscopic permanent contraception cohort, OS is cost-effective with an ICER of $31,432/QALY compared to tubal ligation, and remains cost-effective as long as it reduces ovarian cancer risk by 54{\%}. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated cost-effectiveness with hysterectomy and permanent contraception in 62.3{\%} and 55{\%} of trials, respectively. Conclusions Opportunistic salpingectomy for low-risk women undergoing pelvic surgery may be a cost-effective strategy for decreasing ovarian cancer risk at time of hysterectomy or permanent contraception. In our model, salpingectomy was cost-effective with both procedures, but the advantage greater at time of hysterectomy.",
keywords = "Cost-effectiveness, Ovarian cancer, Salpingectomy",
author = "Dilley, {Sarah E.} and Havrilesky, {Laura J.} and Bakkum-Gamez, {Jamie N} and Cohn, {David E.} and {Michael Straughn}, J. and Caughey, {Aaron B.} and Rodriguez, {Maria I.}",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.034",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "146",
pages = "373--379",
journal = "Gynecologic Oncology",
issn = "0090-8258",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention

AU - Dilley, Sarah E.

AU - Havrilesky, Laura J.

AU - Bakkum-Gamez, Jamie N

AU - Cohn, David E.

AU - Michael Straughn, J.

AU - Caughey, Aaron B.

AU - Rodriguez, Maria I.

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - Objectives Data suggesting a link between the fallopian tube and ovarian cancer have led to an increase in rates of salpingectomy at the time of pelvic surgery, a practice known as opportunistic salpingectomy (OS). However, the potential benefits, risks and costs for this new practice are not well established. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of laparoscopic permanent contraception or hysterectomy for benign indications. Methods We created two models to compare the cost-effectiveness of salpingectomy versus usual care. The hypothetical study population is 50,000 women aged 45 undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation for benign indications, and 300,000 women aged 35 undergoing laparoscopic permanent contraception. SEER data were used for probabilities of ovarian cancer cases and deaths. The ovarian cancer risk reduction, complication rates, utilities and associated costs were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulation were performed, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to determine the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Results In the laparoscopic hysterectomy cohort, OS is cost saving and would yield $23.9 million in health care dollars saved. In the laparoscopic permanent contraception cohort, OS is cost-effective with an ICER of $31,432/QALY compared to tubal ligation, and remains cost-effective as long as it reduces ovarian cancer risk by 54%. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated cost-effectiveness with hysterectomy and permanent contraception in 62.3% and 55% of trials, respectively. Conclusions Opportunistic salpingectomy for low-risk women undergoing pelvic surgery may be a cost-effective strategy for decreasing ovarian cancer risk at time of hysterectomy or permanent contraception. In our model, salpingectomy was cost-effective with both procedures, but the advantage greater at time of hysterectomy.

AB - Objectives Data suggesting a link between the fallopian tube and ovarian cancer have led to an increase in rates of salpingectomy at the time of pelvic surgery, a practice known as opportunistic salpingectomy (OS). However, the potential benefits, risks and costs for this new practice are not well established. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy at the time of laparoscopic permanent contraception or hysterectomy for benign indications. Methods We created two models to compare the cost-effectiveness of salpingectomy versus usual care. The hypothetical study population is 50,000 women aged 45 undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with ovarian preservation for benign indications, and 300,000 women aged 35 undergoing laparoscopic permanent contraception. SEER data were used for probabilities of ovarian cancer cases and deaths. The ovarian cancer risk reduction, complication rates, utilities and associated costs were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulation were performed, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to determine the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Results In the laparoscopic hysterectomy cohort, OS is cost saving and would yield $23.9 million in health care dollars saved. In the laparoscopic permanent contraception cohort, OS is cost-effective with an ICER of $31,432/QALY compared to tubal ligation, and remains cost-effective as long as it reduces ovarian cancer risk by 54%. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated cost-effectiveness with hysterectomy and permanent contraception in 62.3% and 55% of trials, respectively. Conclusions Opportunistic salpingectomy for low-risk women undergoing pelvic surgery may be a cost-effective strategy for decreasing ovarian cancer risk at time of hysterectomy or permanent contraception. In our model, salpingectomy was cost-effective with both procedures, but the advantage greater at time of hysterectomy.

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - Ovarian cancer

KW - Salpingectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020095062&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85020095062&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.034

DO - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.034

M3 - Article

C2 - 28577884

AN - SCOPUS:85020095062

VL - 146

SP - 373

EP - 379

JO - Gynecologic Oncology

JF - Gynecologic Oncology

SN - 0090-8258

IS - 2

ER -