The cost-saving effect of centralized histological reviews with soft tissue and visceral sarcomas, GIST, and desmoid tumors: The experiences of the pathologists of the French Sarcoma Group
Fiche du document
2018
- ISIDORE Id: 10670/1.321f11...
- halshs: halshs-01784301
- doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193330
- PUBMED: 29621244
- PUBMEDCENTRAL: PMC5886412
- WOS: 000429206800005
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0193330
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/29621244
info:eu-repo/semantics/OpenAccess
Citer ce document
Lionel Perrier et al., « The cost-saving effect of centralized histological reviews with soft tissue and visceral sarcomas, GIST, and desmoid tumors: The experiences of the pathologists of the French Sarcoma Group », HAL SHS (Sciences de l’Homme et de la Société), ID : 10.1371/journal.pone.0193330
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
ObjectiveThis study examined the types of discordance occurring in the diagnosis of soft tissue and visceral sarcomas, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), and desmoid tumors, as well as the economic impact of diagnostic discrepancies.MethodsWe carried out a retrospective, multicenter analysis using prospectively implemented databases performed on a cohort of patients within the French RRePS network in 2010. Diagnoses were deemed to be discordant based on the 2013 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. Predictive factors of discordant diagnoses were explored. A decision tree was used to assess the expected costs of two strategies of disease management: one based on revised diagnoses after centralized histological review (option 1), the other on diagnoses without centralized review (option 2). Both were defined based on the patient and the disease characteristics, according to national or international guidelines. The time horizon was 12 months and the perspective of the French National Health Insurance (NHI) was retained. Costs were expressed in Euros for 2013. Sensitivity analyses were performed using low and high scenarios that included 20% estimates for cost.ResultsA total of 2,425 patients were included. Three hundred forty-one patients (14%) had received discordant diagnoses. These discordances were determined to mainly be benign tumors diagnosed as sarcomas (n = 124), or non -sarcoma malignant tumors diagnosed as sarcomas (n = 77). The probability of discordance was higher for a final diagnosis of desmoid tumors when compared to liposarcomas (odds ratio = 5.1; 95%CI [2.6-10.4]). The expected costs per patient for the base-case analysis (low- and high-case scenarios) amounted to 8,791 ( 7,033 and 10,549, respectively) for option 1 and 8,904 ( 7,057 and 10,750, respectively) for option 2.ConclusionsOur findings highlight misdiagnoses of sarcomas, which were found to most often be confused with benign tumors. Centralized histological reviews are likely to provide cost-savings for the French NHI.
