Copyright
©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Radiol. Mar 28, 2014; 6(3): 48-55
Published online Mar 28, 2014. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v6.i3.48
Published online Mar 28, 2014. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v6.i3.48
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) |
Ref. | Year | Country | Tumors(histology) | Reason for exclusion |
Bongers et al[7] | 2002 | Netherlands | Neck (laryngeal cancer) | Cost study |
van Hooren et al[8] | 2009 | Netherlands | Neck (laryngeal carcinoma) | Cost study |
Uly-de Groot et al[9] | 2010 | Netherlands | Head/neck (metastases) | Cost study |
Kurien et al[10] | 2011 | United States | Head/neck (various) | Cost study |
Schergerin et al[11] | 2009 | United States | Breast (various) | No PET comparison |
Auguste et al[12] | 2011 | United Kingdom | Breast (various) | Review |
Cooper et al[13] | 2011 | United Kingdom | Breast (various) | Review |
Strobel et al[14] | 2007 | Switzerland | Lymphoma (various) | Cost study |
Moulin-Romsee et al[15] | 2008 | Belgium | Lymphoma (NHL) | Cost study |
Brush et al[16] | 2011 | United Kingdom | Colon-rectum (various) | Review |
von Schulthess et al[17] | 1998 | Switzerland | Melanoma (various) | Cost study |
Bastiaannet et al[18] | 2012 | Netherlands | Melanoma (various) | Cost study |
Heinzel et al[19] | 2012 | Germany | Brain (glioma) | Aminoacid PET |
Heinzel et al[20] | 2012 | Germany | Brain (glioma) | Aminoacid PET |
Hetzel et al[21] | 2003 | Germany | Bone (metastases) | F18-Fluoride PET |
Tateishi et al[22] | 2010 | Japan | Bone (metastases) | F18-Fluoride PET |
Heinrich et al[23] | 2005 | Austria | Pancreas (various) | Cost study |
Rondina et al[24] | 2012 | United States | Occult (various) | Cost study |
- Citation: Annunziata S, Caldarella C, Treglia G. Cost-effectiveness of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in tumours other than lung cancer: A systematic review. World J Radiol 2014; 6(3): 48-55
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8470/full/v6/i3/48.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v6.i3.48