Lionel Perrier, Magali Morelle, Sylvie Bonvalot, Daniel Orbach, C. Llacer, Anne Ducassou, Erwan Drezen, Claire Chemin-Airiau, Hugo Crochet, Françoise Ducimetiere, Francois Gouin, André Happe, Noémie Huchet, François Le Loarer, Axel Lecesne, Simone Mathoulin-Pelissier, Pierre Méeus, Emmanuel Oger, V. Thevenet, Maud Toulmonde, Gualter Vaz, Marie Karanian, Carine Ngo, Gonzague de Pinieux, Anne Gomez-Mascard, Emmanuelle Bompas, Nicolas Macagno, Nelly Firmin, Nicolas Penel, Jean-Yves Blay
OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in improving survival for patients with sarcoma is debated. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) comparing AC vs. no AC for non-metastatic sarcoma based on the nationwide retrospective study DEEPSARC. METHODS: The CEA was carried out over a 1-, 3-, and five-year horizon, using data from the French NETSARC+ database linked to the French national health data system (SNDS).There was no age limit and no specific histological type selection in the reference case analysis. Costs (expressed in 2021 EUR) were provided by the SNDS from the French national health insurance perspective. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICER) were expressed in cost per life-year gained (LYG). Propensity score analysis with 1:1 matching was undertaken. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 33,548 patients from the French NETSARC+ database, 24,539 were linked to the SNDS. A total of 14,808 patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2017 were included in the reference case analysis with 2,784 patients after propensity score matching. Mean costs (SD) [95% CI] differences per patient between AC and no AC were €12,826 (36,758) [10,883-14,719], €15,706 (49,849) [13,330-18,383], and €16,841 (56,060) [13,590-19,657] at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Mean overall survival differences per patient (in years) were 0.0066 (0.1685) [-0.0021 to 0.0157], -0.0728 (0.9336) [-0.1237 to -0.0229], and -0.1204 (1.3595) [-0.1926 to -0.0475] at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. ICER was €1,934,511 [-11,767,351-15,829,959] per LYG at 1 year. AC lagged behind at 3 and 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: In the reference case analysis, AC outperformed its use in terms of outcomes at 1 year, but a high level of willingness to pay would be required for AC to be cost-effective. At 3 and 5 years, AC was deemed to be not cost-effective for patients with non-metastatic sarcoma.