Cost-effectiveness of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in tumours other than lung cancer: A systematic review

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies

Ref.	Year	Country	Tumour (histology)	Indication	Perspective,type of study	Results, unit and comparison alternatives
Hollenbeak et al[25]	2001	United States	Neck (various)	Staging	Hospital, decision tree	ICER (US$/LYG (US$/QALY)): 8718 (2505) (CT + PET vs CT)
Yen et al[26]	2009	Taiwan	Head/neck (nasopharyngeal carcinoma)	Restaging	Hospital, decision tree	ICUR (US$/QALY): 462 (PET + MRI vs MRI)
Sher et al[27]	2010	United States	Head/neck (squamous cell carcinoma)	Restaging	Public payer (medicare), markov model	ICER (US$/QALY): 1500 (PET-CT vs CT in RD after chemiotherapy)
Rabalais et al[28]	2012	United States	Head/Neck (various)	Restaging	Public payer (medicare), decision tree	ICER (US $): 3854397 (PET-CT vs neck dissection)
Sloka et al[29]	2005	Canada	Breast (various)	Staging	Hospital, meta-analysis, decision tree	PET + ALND dominating ALND [cost savings (US $): 695, increase in life expectancy: 7.4 d]
Meng et al[30]	2011	United Kingdom	Breast (various)	Staging	Health care system, decision tree	NMB (UK£ 30000 per QALY): 1085 (replace SLNB with PET)
Klose et al[31]	2000	Germany	Lymphoma (various)	Staging	Hospital, micro-costing approach	ICER (€): 3133 (FDG-PET vs CT)
Bradbury et al[6]	2002	United Kingdom	Lymphoma (HL)	Restaging	Health care system, decision tree and Markov model	WTP (£/LYG): 1000 (PET after positive CT vs CT + PET)
Cerci et al[32]	2010	Brazil	Lymphoma (HL)	Post-treat	Hospital, decision tree	ICER ($): 3268 (CT + PET + biopsy vs CT + biopsy)
Cerci et al[33]	2011	Brazil	Lymphoma (HL)	Staging	Hospital, micro-costing approach	ICER ($): 16215 (PET/CT vs CT and biopsy)
Park et al[34]	2001	United States	Colon-rectum (various)	Restaging	Public payer (medicare), decision tree	ICER (US$/LYG): 16437 (CT + PET vs PET)
Lejeune et al[35]	2005	France	Colon-rectum (metastases)	Staging	Health care system, decision tree	ICER: dominated (CT vs CT + PET)
Wiering et al[36]	2010	Netherlands	Colon-rectum (metastases)	Restaging	Health care system, randomized clinical trial	NMB (€): 11060 (CWU vs CWU + FDG-PET)
Krug et al[37]	2010	Belgium	Melanoma (metastases)	Restaging	Health care system, Markov model	ICER: dominated (PET-TC vs CT). NMB (€):1048, gain of 0.2 LMG
Wallace et al[38]	2002	United States	Esophagus (various)	Staging	Public payer (medicare), decision tree	Marginal ICER ($/QALY): 60544 (PET + EUS-FNA vs CT + EUS-FNA)
Mansueto et al[39]	2009	Italy	Ovary (various)	Restaging	Health care system, decision tree	ICER (€/SA): 226.77 (PET/CT for All)

CT: Computerized tomography; ICER: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; ICUR: Incremental cost-utility ratio; LYG: Life-year gained; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; RD: Residual disease; PET: Positron emission tomography; QALY: Quality-adjusted life-year; NMB: Net monetary benefit; ALND: Axillary lymph node dissection; HL: Hodgkin lymphoma; NHL: Non-Hodgkin lymphoma; CWU: Conventional diagnostic work-up; WTP: Willingness to pay; EUS-FNA: Endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration biopsy; SLNB: Sentinel lymph node biopsy; SA: Surgery avoided; UK:United Kindom; US: United States.