Is upper gastrointestinal radiography a cost-effective alternative to a Helicobacter pylori “Test and Treat” strategy for patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease?

Current clinical consensus supports an initial Helicobacter pylori (HP) “test and treat” approach when compared to immediate endoscopy for patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease. Alternative diagnostic approaches that incorporate upper GI radiography (UGI) have not been previously evaluated. We sought to determine the cost effectiveness of UGI compared to a HP test and treat strategy, incorporating recent data addressing the reduced prevalence of HP, lower cost of diagnostic interventions, and reduced attribution of PUD to HP. METHODS : Using decision analysis, three diagnostic and treatment strategies were evaluated: 1) Test and Treat —initial HP serology, treat patients who test positive with HP eradication and antiulcer therapy; 2) Initial UGI series —treat all patients with documented ulcer disease with HP eradication and antiulcer therapy; and 3) Initial UGI series, HP serology if ulcer present — treat ulcer and HP based on diagnostic test results. RESULTS : The estimated cost per ulcer cured for each strategy were as follows: test and treat, $3,025; initial UGI,$3,690; and UGI with serology, $3,790. The estimated cost per patient treatment were: test and treat,$498; initial UGI, $610; and UGI with serology,$620. When UGI reimbursement was decreased to less than $50, the UGI strategies yielded a lower cost per patient treated than the test and treat strategy. CONCLUSION : At the current level of reimbursement, UGI should not be considered a cost-effective alternative to the HP test and treat strategy for the initial evaluation of patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73722/1/j.1572-0241.2000.01837.x.pd

Completion Dissection or Observation for Sentinel-Node Metastasis in Melanoma.

Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy is associated with increased melanoma-specific survival (i.e., survival until death from melanoma) among patients with node-positive intermediate-thickness melanomas (1.2 to 3.5 mm). The value of completion lymph-node dissection for patients with sentinel-node metastases is not clear. In an international trial, we randomly assigned patients with sentinel-node metastases detected by means of standard pathological assessment or a multimarker molecular assay to immediate completion lymph-node dissection (dissection group) or nodal observation with ultrasonography (observation group). The primary end point was melanoma-specific survival. Secondary end points included disease-free survival and the cumulative rate of nonsentinel-node metastasis. Immediate completion lymph-node dissection was not associated with increased melanoma-specific survival among 1934 patients with data that could be evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis or among 1755 patients in the per-protocol analysis. In the per-protocol analysis, the mean (±SE) 3-year rate of melanoma-specific survival was similar in the dissection group and the observation group (86±1.3% and 86±1.2%, respectively; P=0.42 by the log-rank test) at a median follow-up of 43 months. The rate of disease-free survival was slightly higher in the dissection group than in the observation group (68±1.7% and 63±1.7%, respectively; P=0.05 by the log-rank test) at 3 years, based on an increased rate of disease control in the regional nodes at 3 years (92±1.0% vs. 77±1.5%; P<0.001 by the log-rank test); these results must be interpreted with caution. Nonsentinel-node metastases, identified in 11.5% of the patients in the dissection group, were a strong, independent prognostic factor for recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.78; P=0.005). Lymphedema was observed in 24.1% of the patients in the dissection group and in 6.3% of those in the observation group. Immediate completion lymph-node dissection increased the rate of regional disease control and provided prognostic information but did not increase melanoma-specific survival among patients with melanoma and sentinel-node metastases. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; MSLT-II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00297895 .)