Economic Evaluation of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC), CHERE Working Paper 2007/6

Scott 1998, USA	a) CT - if positive then mediastinoscopy b) PET after negative CT (mediastinoscopy after +ve PET or +ve CT ) c) PET and CT (mediastinoscopy after +ve PET) d) PET and CT (mediastinoscopy after +ve CT or +ve PET or -ve CT)	Potentially operable NSCLC	Cost effectiveness	LY gained	Decision Analysis	b) vs a) 0.007 LY c) vs a) 0.009 LY d) vs a) 0.007 LY	b) vs a) $177 c) vs a) $638 d) vs a) $965	b) vs a) $25,286/ LY gained c) vs a) $70,889/ LY gained d) vs a) $37,857/ LY gained
Verboom et al (2003) The Netherlands	a) Conventional work up (CWU) Including CT, MRI, ultrasound, bone scan, invasive test brochoscopym mediastinoscopy and invasive surgery. b) CWU + 18 FDG- PET (whole body)_____________	Medically operable NSCLC (n188)	Cost effectiveness	Number of futile thoractomies	Randomised Control trial	a) 39 futile thoractomies b) 19 futile thoractomies	a) € 9,573 b) € 8284	CWU + PET dominates
Viney et al (2002) Australia	a) CT scan (Thorax, upper abdomen and brain + X ray) b) CT scan + PET	Patients with stage I and II lung cancer potentially opeperable (n184)	Cost effectiveness	Number of futile thoractomies	Randomised control trial	b) vs a) 0.22 thoractomies avoided	b vs a) $A 2,655	b) vs a) $120,681/ thoractomy avoided
Kosuda et al (2002)	a) Whole body (WB) PET b) Conventional imaging + WB-PET	Potentially operable NSCLC	Cost effectiveness	Life expectancy	Decision analysis	b) vs a) gain in LE of minus 0.0246 years to 0.0136 years.	b) vs a) cost saving of $951 to $1,493 per patient	n/a