The financial landscape for treating advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is complex, with systemic therapies exhibiting significant cost variability compared to the more stable pricing of transarterial radioembolization (TARE).
Systemic therapy (ST) and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) continue to be primary treatment options for patients with unresectable HCC. Recent research highlights substantial discrepancies in treatment costs from both payer and provider perspectives, emphasizing the economic challenges associated with ST.
Cost Analysis of Systemic Therapy
An Excel-based price analysis model evaluated the costs of ST and TARE over a 21-month period using data from 2015 to 2021. Median prices were calculated based on Medicare Average Sales Price (ASP), Wholesale Acquisition Cost (WAC), and Average Wholesale Price (AWP). The analysis revealed that ST costs varied significantly, with median ASP at $175,625, WAC at $198,719, and AWP at $262,892, reflecting considerable price instability across different pricing metrics.
Stability in Transarterial Radioembolization Pricing
In contrast, TARE demonstrated price stability, with costs ranging between $21,594 and $24,052. Sensitivity analyses showed that a 10% variation in treatment duration could lead to price fluctuations of $35,000–$50,000 for ST, whereas TARE prices varied by approximately $5,000. The consistent pricing of TARE is attributed to standardized procedural costs, unlike ST, where treatment duration and drug-specific pricing mechanisms, particularly immunotherapy regimens, drive higher costs.
– ST pricing is highly sensitive to treatment duration and specific drug costs
– Immunotherapy-based regimens significantly contribute to higher ST costs
– TARE offers a more predictable financial model due to standardized procedures
– Economic advantages of TARE become evident in appropriate clinical contexts
The significant variability in systemic therapy costs, compared to the consistent expenses associated with TARE, underscores the potential economic benefits of TARE for patients with advanced HCC. Healthcare providers and payers must consider these cost dynamics when making treatment decisions to ensure both clinical efficacy and financial sustainability.
Adopting standardized pricing models and implementing cost-containment strategies for systemic therapies could mitigate the financial burden on patients and the healthcare system. Additionally, comprehensive cost-effectiveness studies comparing ST and TARE can inform policy reforms and optimize treatment protocols, enhancing patient access to effective and affordable cancer therapies.
This article has been prepared with the assistance of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more details, please refer to our Terms and Conditions. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author.
