Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATATE PET/MRI in Radiotherapy Planning in Patients with Intermediate-Risk Meningioma

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Ostrom QT,
   2. Price M,
   3. Ryan K, et al

   . CBTRUS Statistical Report: Pediatric Brain Tumor Foundation Childhood and Adolescent Primary Brain and Other Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2014-2018. Neuro Oncol 2022;24:iii1–38 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noac161 pmid:36066969

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Rogers L,
   2. Barani I,
   3. Chamberlain M, et al

   . Meningiomas: knowledge base, treatment outcomes, and uncertainties: a RANO review. J Neurosurg 2015;122:4–23 doi:10.3171/2014.7.JNS131644 pmid:25343186

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Rogers L,
   2. Zhang P,
   3. Vogelbaum MA, et al

   . Intermediate-risk meningioma: initial outcomes from NRG Oncology RTOG 0539. J Neurosurg 2018;129:35–47 doi:10.3171/2016.11.JNS161170 pmid:28984517

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Goldbrunner R,
   2. Stavrinou P,
   3. Jenkinson MD, et al

   . EANO guideline on the diagnosis and management of meningiomas. Neuro Oncol 2021;23:1821–34 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noab150 pmid:34181733

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Magill ST,
   2. Dalle Ore CL,
   3. Diaz MA, et al

   . Surgical outcomes after reoperation for recurrent non-skull base meningiomas. J Neurosurg 2018 Nov 1. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.3171/2018.6.JNS18118 pmid:30544357

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Magill ST,
   2. Lee DS,
   3. Yen AJ, et al

   . Surgical outcomes after reoperation for recurrent skull base meningiomas. J Neurosurg 2018;130:876–83 doi:10.3171/2017.11.JNS172278 pmid:29726777

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Mahase SS,
   2. Roth O’Brien DA,
   3. No D, et al

   . [⁶⁸Ga]-DOTATATE PET/MRI as an adjunct imaging modality for radiation treatment planning of meningiomas. Neurooncol Adv 2021;3:vdab012 doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdab012 pmid:33738446

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Halliday J,
   2. Fernandes H

   . Meningioma recurrence: the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of current screening. Br J Neurosurg 2010;24:55–61 doi:10.3109/02688690903431813 pmid:20158354

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Ivanidze J,
   2. Roytman M,
   3. Lin E, et al

   . Gallium-68 DOTATATE PET in the evaluation of intracranial meningiomas. J Neuroimaging 2019;29:650–56 doi:10.1111/jon.12632 pmid:31107591

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Reubi JC,
    2. Schar JC,
    3. Waser B, et al

    . Affinity profiles for human somatostatin receptor subtypes SST1-SST5 of somatostatin radiotracers selected for scintigraphic and radiotherapeutic use. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27:273–82 doi:10.1007/s002590050034 pmid:10774879

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Silva CB,
    2. Ongaratti BR,
    3. Trott G, et al

    . Expression of somatostatin receptors (SSTR1-SSTR5) in meningiomas and its clinicopathological significance. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2015;8:13185–92 pmid:26722517

    PubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Hofman MS,
    2. Lau WF,
    3. Hicks RJ

    . Somatostatin receptor imaging with 68Ga DOTATATE PET/CT: clinical utility, normal patterns, pearls, and pitfalls in interpretation. Radiographics 2015;35:500–16 doi:10.1148/rg.352140164 pmid:25763733

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Kunz WG,
    2. Jungblut LM,
    3. Kazmierczak PM, et al

    . Improved detection of transosseous meningiomas using ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT compared with contrast-enhanced MRI. J Nucl Med 2017;58:1580–87 doi:10.2967/jnumed.117.191932 pmid:28450556

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    1. Graf R,
    2. Plotkin M,
    3. Steffen IG, et al

    . Magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATOC positron emission tomography for imaging skull base meningiomas with infracranial extension treated with stereotactic radiotherapy: a case series. Head Face Med 2012;8:1 doi:10.1186/1746-160X-8-1 pmid:22217329

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Kim SH,
    2. Roytman M,
    3. Madera G, et al

    . Evaluating diagnostic accuracy and determining optimal diagnostic thresholds of different approaches to [⁶⁸Ga]-DOTATATE PET/MRI analysis in patients with meningioma. Sci Rep 2022;12:9256 doi:10.1038/s41598-022-13467-9 pmid:35661809

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Ivanidze J,
    2. Roytman M,
    3. Skafida M, et al

    . Dynamic ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATATE PET/MRI in the diagnosis and management of intracranial meningiomas. Radiol Imaging Cancer 2022;4:e210067 doi:10.1148/rycan.210067 pmid:35275019

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Perlow HK,
    2. Siedow M,
    3. Gokun Y, et al

    . ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATATE PET-based radiation contouring creates more precise radiation volumes for patients with meningioma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022;113:859–65 doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.04.009 pmid:35460804

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Kowalski ES,
    2. Khairnar R,
    3. Gryaznov AA, et al

    . ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATATE PET-CT as a tool for radiation planning and evaluating treatment responses in the clinical management of meningiomas. Radiat Oncol 2021;16:151 doi:10.1186/s13014-021-01875-6 pmid:34399805

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Sun SQ,
    2. Cai C,
    3. Murphy RK, et al

    . Radiation therapy for residual or recurrent atypical meningioma: the effects of modality, timing, and tumor pathology on long-term outcomes. Neurosurgery 2016;79:23–32 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001160 pmid:26645969

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Mirimanoff RO,
    2. Dosoretz DE,
    3. Linggood RM, et al

    . Meningioma: analysis of recurrence and progression following neurosurgical resection. J Neurosurg 1985;62:18–24 doi:10.3171/jns.1985.62.1.0018 pmid:3964853

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    1. Brem SS,
    2. Bierman PJ,
    3. Black P, et al

    ; National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Central nervous system cancers: clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2005;3:644–90 doi:10.6004/jnccn.2005.0038 pmid:16194456

    Abstract
22. 22.↵
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). November 27, 2017. https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocoldevelopment/electronic_applications/docs/CTCAE_v5_Quick_Reference_5x7.pdf. Accessed May 23, 2021
23. 23.↵
    1. Zollner B,
    2. Ganswindt U,
    3. Maihofer C, et al

    . Recurrence pattern analysis after [⁶⁸Ga]-DOTATATE-PET/CT-planned radiotherapy of high-grade meningiomas. Radiat Oncol 2018;13:110 doi:10.1186/s13014-018-1056-4 pmid:29898747

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Pan PC,
    2. Pisapia DJ,
    3. Ramakrishna R, et al

    . Outcomes following upfront radiation versus monitoring in atypical meningiomas: 16-year experience at a tertiary medical center. Neurooncol Adv 2021;3:vdab094 doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdab094 pmid:34345823

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Pollock BE,
    2. Stafford SL,
    3. Link MJ, et al

    . Stereotactic radiosurgery of World Health Organization grade II and III intracranial meningiomas: treatment results on the basis of a 22-year experience. Cancer 2012;118:1048–54 doi:10.1002/cncr.26362 pmid:21773968

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Dohm A,
    2. McTyre ER,
    3. Chan MD, et al

    . Early or late radiotherapy following gross or subtotal resection for atypical meningiomas: clinical outcomes and local control. J Clin Neurosci 2017;46:90–98 doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2017.08.023 pmid:28917587

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Qian Y,
    2. Maruyama S,
    3. Kim H, et al

    . Cost-effectiveness of radiation and chemotherapy for high-risk low-grade glioma. Neuro Oncol 2017;19:1651–60 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nox121 pmid:28666368

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Knoll MA,
    2. Olsen A

    . Incentivizing delayed claiming of social security retirement benefits before reaching the full retirement age. Social Security Bulletin 2014;74:23
29. 29.↵
    1. Sanders GD,
    2. Neumann PJ,
    3. Basu A, et al

    . Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA 2016;316:1093–103 doi:10.1001/jama.2016.12195 pmid:27623463

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    1. Arias E,
    2. Xu J

    . United States Life Tables, 2018. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2020;69:1–45 pmid:33270553

    PubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Cea-Soriano L,
    2. Wallander MA,
    3. García Rodríguez LA

    . Epidemiology of meningioma in the United Kingdom. Neuroepidemiology 2012;39:27–34 doi:10.1159/000338081 pmid:22777495

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Cohen DJ,
    2. Reynolds MR

    . Interpreting the results of cost-effectiveness studies. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:2119–26 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2008.09.018 pmid:19095128

    FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    1. Whitehead SJ,
    2. Ali S

    . Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull 2010;96:5–21 doi:10.1093/bmb/ldq033 pmid:21037243

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
34. 34.↵
    1. Neumann PJ,
    2. Cohen JT,
    3. Weinstein MC

    . Updating cost-effectiveness: the curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold. N Engl J Med 2014;371:796–97 doi:10.1056/NEJMp1405158 pmid:25162885

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
35. 35.↵
    1. Hiroiwa T,
    2. Sung YK,
    3. Fukuda T, et al

    . International survey on willingness-to-pay (WTP) for one additional QALY gained: what is the threshold of cost effectiveness? Health Econ 2010;19:422–37 doi:10.1002/hec.1481 pmid:19382128

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
36. 36.↵
    1. Ryen L,
    2. Svensson M

    . The willingness to pay for a quality adjusted life year: a review of the empirical literature. Health Econ 2015;24:1289–301 doi:10.1002/hec.3085 pmid:25070495

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    1. Wouters OJ,
    2. Naci H,
    3. Samani NJ

    . QALYs in cost-effectiveness analysis: an overview for cardiologists. Heart 2015;101:1868–73 doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2015-308255 pmid:26395316

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
38. 38.↵
    1. Wilson TA,
    2. Huang L,
    3. Ramanathan D, et al

    . Review of atypical and anaplastic meningiomas: classification, molecular biology, and management. Front Oncol 2020;10:565582 doi:10.3389/fonc.2020.565582 pmid:33330036

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    1. Recker MJ,
    2. Kuo CC,
    3. Prasad D, et al

    . Incidence trends and survival analysis of atypical meningiomas: a population-based study from 2004 to 2018. J Neurooncol 2022;160:13–22 doi:10.1007/s11060-022-04085-6 pmid:35819682

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    1. Froelich MF,
    2. Schnitzer ML,
    3. Holzgreve A, et al

    . Cost-effectiveness analysis of ⁶⁸Ga DOTA-TATE PET/CT, ¹¹¹In-Pentetreotide SPECT/CT and CT for diagnostic workup of neuroendocrine tumors. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021;11:334 doi:10.3390/diagnostics11020334 pmid:33670457

    CrossRefPubMed
41. 41.↵
    1. Schreiter NF,
    2. Brenner W,
    3. Nogami M, et al

    . Cost comparison of ¹¹¹In-DTPA-octreotide scintigraphy and ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT for staging enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012;39:72–82 doi:10.1007/s00259-011-1935-5 pmid:21927931

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    1. Sommerauer M,
    2. Burkhardt JK,
    3. Frontzek K, et al

    . ⁶⁸Gallium-DOTATATE PET in meningioma: a reliable predictor of tumor growth rate? Neuro Oncol 2016;18:1021–27 doi:10.1093/neuonc/now001 pmid:26865086

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    1. Berzaczy D,
    2. Giraudo C,
    3. Haug AR, et al

    . Whole-body ⁶⁸Ga-DOTANOC PET/MRI versus ⁶⁸Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT in patients with neuroendocrine tumors: a prospective study in 28 patients. Clin Nucl Med 2017;42:669–74 doi:10.1097/RLU.0000000000001753 pmid:28682844

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    1. Afshar-Oromieh A,
    2. Wolf MB,
    3. Kratochwil C, et al

    . Comparison of ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATOC-PET/CT and PET/MRI hybrid systems in patients with cranial meningioma: initial results. Neuro Oncol 2015;17:312–19 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nou131 pmid:25008094

    CrossRefPubMed
45. 45.↵
    1. Roytman M,
    2. Pisapia DJ,
    3. Liechty B, et al

    . Somatostatin receptor-2 negative meningioma: pathologic correlation and imaging implications. Clin Imaging 2020;66:18–22 doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2020.04.026 pmid:32442855

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    1. Kunz WG,
    2. Hunink MG,
    3. Dimitriadis K, et al

    . Cost-effectiveness of endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review of the impact of patient age. Radiology 2018;288:518–26 doi:10.1148/radiol.2018172886 pmid:29893641

    CrossRefPubMed
47. 47.↵
    1. Aghi MK,
    2. Carter BS,
    3. Cosgrove GR, et al

    . Long-term recurrence rates of atypical meningiomas after gross total resection with or without postoperative adjuvant radiation. Neurosurgery 2009;64:56–60; discussion 60 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000330399.55586.63 pmid:19145156

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
48. 48.↵
    1. Louis DN,
    2. Perry A,
    3. Wesseling P, et al

    . The 2021 WHO Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Neuro Oncol 2021;23:1231–51 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noab106 pmid:34185076

    CrossRefPubMed
49. 49.↵
    1. Prasad RN,
    2. Perlow HK,
    3. Bovi J, et al

    . ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATATE PET: the future of meningioma treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022;113:868–71 doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.04.041 pmid:35772444

    CrossRefPubMed
50. 50.↵
    1. Maas SL,
    2. Stichel D,
    3. Hielscher T, et al

    ; German Consortium on Aggressive Meningiomas (KAM). Integrated molecular-morphologic meningioma classification: a multicenter retrospective analysis, retrospectively and prospectively validated. J Clin Oncol 2021;39:3839–52 doi:10.1200/JCO.21.00784 pmid:34618539

    CrossRefPubMed
51. 51.↵
    1. Nassiri F,
    2. Liu J,
    3. Patil V, et al

    . A clinically applicable integrative molecular classification of meningiomas. Nature 2021;597:119–25 doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03850-3 pmid:34433969

    CrossRefPubMed
52. 52.↵
    1. Raleigh D,
    2. Chen W,
    3. Choudhury A, et al

    . Targeted gene expression profiling predicts meningioma outcomes and radiotherapy responses. Res Sq March 20, 2023;rs.3.rs-2663611 doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2663611/v1 pmid:36993741

    CrossRefPubMed
53. 53.↵
    1. Choudhury A,
    2. Magill ST,
    3. Eaton CD, et al

    . Meningioma DNA methylation groups identify biological drivers and therapeutic vulnerabilities. Nat Genet 2022;54:649–59 doi:10.1038/s41588-022-01061-8 pmid:35534562

    CrossRefPubMed