Cost-Effectiveness of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score Test in the Brazilian Private Health Care Sector

PURPOSE: Breast cancer imposes a substantial disease burden on the Brazilian population. Furthermore, the potential unnecessary use of adjuvant chemotherapy exposes patients to risks and adverse effects without significant therapeutic benefits. The purpose of this study is to determine the extent to which genomic testing for treatment selection, particularly in early stages, is a cost-effective strategy for optimizing care, while minimizing costs and unnecessary interventions. METHODS: We estimated the economic impact of the Oncotype DX test to guide the decision about prescribing adjuvant chemotherapy. The model integrates a decision tree and a Markov model with transitions between the health states of recurrence-free survival, distant recurrence, acute myeloid leukemia, and death. The probabilities of distant recurrence were derived from the TAILORx and RxPONDER clinical trials, combined with local evidence regarding utility and overall survival estimates. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Brazilian private health care system, which covers about one quarter of the Brazilian population. Scenario and sensitivity analyses with Monte Carlo simulations were performed. RESULTS: Compared with clinicopathologic risk assessment alone, use of the Oncotype DX test for both node-negative (N0) and node-positive (N1) leads to an increase in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at lower costs (0.15 QALYs and $-3,975.59 US dollars [USD]). The main impact drivers were chemotherapy costs, chemotherapy prescription probabilities, and Oncotype DX test cost. Considering the Brazilian official cost-effectiveness thresholds ($8,000.00 USD to $24,000.00 USD per QALY), the probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a high probability of the test being cost-effective across all analyzed scenarios and indications. CONCLUSION: Oncotype DX could be a cost-saving strategy in the Brazilian private health care perspective. Alternative scenarios and testing indications did not alter these conclusions.