Supplementary data: Cost–effectiveness of concurrent radiation with cetuximab or chemotherapy in older patients with oropharyngeal cancer

<b>These are peer-reviewed supplementary materials for the article '</b><b>Cost–effectiveness of concurrent radiation </b><b>with cetuximab or chemotherapy in older </b><b>patients with oropharyngeal cancer</b><b>' published in the</b><b> </b><b><i>Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research</i></b><b>.</b><b>Appendix Table 1:</b> Matching variables for each comparison<b>Appendix Table 2:</b> Censoring rates at 5 years, stratified by treatment groups and diagnosis period<b>Appendix Table 3:</b> Characteristics of the matched sample comparing the RT and CRT groups in Cohort I<b>Appendix Table 4:</b> Characteristics of the matched sample comparing the RT and CRT groups in Cohort II<b>Appendix Table 5:</b><b> </b>Characteristics of the matched sample comparing the RT and cetuximab-RT groups in Cohort II<b>Appendix Table 6:</b><b> </b>Characteristics of the matched sample comparing the CRT and cetuximab-RT groups in Cohort II<b>Aim: </b>To assess the cost–effectiveness of definitive therapies for nonmetastatic oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). <b>Materials &amp; methods: </b>Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset, patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 were identified. The cost–effectiveness of chemoradiation (CRT) versus radiotherapy (RT), cetuximab plus RT (cetuximab-RT) versus RT and cetuximab-RT versus CRT were estimated. <b>Results: </b>The incremental cost–effectiveness ratio for CRT compared with RT from 2000 to 2005 was US$56,650 (95% CI: US$4,522–$288,688) per additional year of survival. CRT was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. Cetuximab-RT was dominated by RT and CRT. <b>Conclusion:</b> CRT had a favorable value from 2000 to 2005 but was dominated by RT from 2006 to 2011. The value of cetuximab-RT compared with RT/CRT was not favorable with similar/inferior survival and substantial incremental costs.