Cost-effectiveness analysis of a cardio-oncology rehabilitation framework compared to an exercise intervention for cancer survivors with high cardiovascular risk

A cardio-oncology rehabilitation model among cancer survivors showed superior results comparing to a community-based exercise intervention. However, questions remain about its cost-effectiveness. To assess the cost-effectiveness of a center-based cardiac rehabilitation (CBCR) program when compared to usual care encompassing a community-based exercise training (CBET), among cancer survivors with high cardiovascular risk. The CORE study was a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial; 80 adult cancer survivors with previous exposure to cardiotoxic cancer treatment and/or with previous cardiovascular disease were assigned (1:1 ratio) to an 8-week CBCR or CBET, twice/week. Cost-effectiveness was a pre-specified secondary endpoint. Outcomes included healthcare resource use and costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost-effectiveness; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was computed from a societal perspective. 75 patients completed the study (CBCR N=38; CBET N=37). The CBCR had significantly higher cost per patient (477.76 ± 39.08€) compared to CBET group (339.32 ± 53.88€), with a significant between-group difference 138.44€ (95% CI, 116.82 to 160.05€, p