Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the estimated public medical care cost of measures to address metallic dental restorations (MDRs) for head and neck radiotherapy using high-energy mega-voltage X-rays. This was considered a first step to clarify which MDR measure was more cost-effective. We estimated the medical care cost of radiotherapy for two representative MDR measures: (i) with MDR removal or (ii) without MDR removal (non-MDR removal) using magnetic resonance imaging and a spacer. A total of 5520 patients received head and neck radiation therapy in 2018. The mean number of MDRs per person was 4.1 dental crowns and 1.3 dental bridges. The mean cost per person was estimated to be 121 720 yen for MDR removal and 54 940 yen for non-MDR removal. Therefore, the difference in total public medical care cost between MDR removal and non-MDR removal was estimated to be 303 268 800 yen. Our results suggested that non-MDR removal would be more cost-effective than MDR removal for head and neck radiotherapy. In the future, a national survey and cost-effectiveness analysis via a multicenter study are necessary; these investigations should include various outcomes such as the rate of local control, status of oral mucositis, frequency of hospital visits and efforts of the medical professionals.
Keywords: head and neck radiotherapy, public medical care cost, metallic dental restoration, mouthpiece, magnetic resonance imaging
INTRODUCTION
During head and neck radiotherapy, metallic dental restorations (MDRs) within the radiation field may lead to less accurate radiotherapy. This is due not only to exacerbation of oral mucositis caused by backscatter radiation from MDRs [1, 2], but also to uncertainty caused by metal artifacts in contouring the target volumes (TVs) such as primary tumor location and organs at risk (OARs) [3, 4].
It is well known that using a mouthpiece as a spacer and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are useful tools to counteract backscatter radiation [5–8] and metal artifacts [8–10], respectively. In Japan, the radiotherapy planning guidelines of the Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology (JASTRO) recommend either MDR removal or non-MDR removal, as differing measures against MDRs for external beam radiotherapy using high-energy mega-voltage X-rays [11]. With MDR removal, radiotherapy treatment planning and actual treatment are conducted after removing MDRs. If MDRs are not removed (non-MDR removal), radiotherapy treatment planning is conducted by using MRI to identify the TVs and OARs. This is done after replacing the Hounsfield units (HUs) of the pixels in the streaks resulting from the presence of MDRs by the HUs of a soft tissue class or water class, as far as possible. After treatment planning, non-MDR removal is performed by inserting a mouthpiece as a spacer to prevent exacerbation of oral mucositis caused by backscatter radiation. As the JASTRO guidelines have recommendations for both MDR removal and non-MDR removal, measures against MDRs differ in each hospital in Japan [12]. Partly because of current efforts to eliminate cancer care disparities and to appropriately contain medical care costs, it is important to clarify the costs of MDR removal and non-MDR removal. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the public medical care costs of MDR removal and non-MDR removal to clarify which measure was more cost-effective for managing MDRs in head and neck radiotherapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The number of patients with head and neck cancer, the number of MDRs per person and calculation of the public medical care cost referred to the 2018 Japanese Radiation Oncology Database, the 2016 Survey of Dental Diseases of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, and the 2020 table of dental or medical fee points of the Ministerial Notification No. 57 of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, respectively.
The eligible age group for the cost estimation was set at 40–79 years old, because this age group accounted for >95% of all head and neck cancer registrants in the 2017 Report of Head and Neck Cancer Registry of Japan Clinical Statistics of Registered Patients by the Cancer Registry Committee of the Japanese Society for Head and Neck Cancer,
The public medical care cost of MDR removal was calculated based on dental crowns and dental bridges that were most likely to generate problematic strong metal artifacts, excluding dental fillings such as dental inlays. The 2016 Survey of Dental Diseases of the Ministry of Health did not describe the location of MDRs and the number of missing teeth. Thus, the refabricated dental crowns and dental bridges (commonly used for MDRs) were assumed to be the molar crowns and the bridge between the second premolar and second molar that had the first molar missing, respectively. The materials used for MDRs, the impression method and setting material were assumed to be Au–Pd full metal, combined impression and standard glass ionomer cement, respectively. In addition, we adopted the typical dental fee points to calculate the estimated cost of MDR removal.
In non-MDR removal, the MRI equipment was assumed to be the widely used 1.5–3.0 Tesla MRI scanner. It was also assumed that mouthpieces to use as a spacer were fabricated for the upper and lower jaw. A cost-minimization analysis was used to compare the public medical care costs of MDR removal and non-MDR removal procedures.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A total of 5520 patients (4192 males and 1326 females) received head and neck radiation therapy in 2018.
Table 1 shows the estimated mean number of MDRs per person in each age group from 40 to 79 years old. The estimated mean number of MDRs per person in the entire age group was 4.1 dental crowns and 1.3 dental bridges.
Table 1.
The estimated number of the metallic dental restorations per person
| Age (years) | Mean number per person |
|---|---|
| Dental crowns | |
| 40–79 | 4.1 |
| 40–49 | 2.9 |
| 50–59 | 4.4 |
| 60–69 | 4.6 |
| 70–79 | 4.4 |
| Dental bridges | |
| 40–79 | 1.3 |
| 40–49 | 0.5 |
| 50–59 | 1.3 |
| 60–69 | 1.8 |
| 70–79 | 1.7 |
Including MDRs in the radiation field may induce dose alterations, with dose enhancement and dose attenuation that cannot be accurately computed on a treatment planning system (TPS) [5, 13]. Therefore, there is concern that these dose alterations may potentially lead to severe oral mucositis and the survival of malignant cells. Moreover, metal artifacts from MDRs may negatively impact the consistency of delineation [3, 4] and cause imprecise or incorrect dose calculation [14] in radiation treatment planning. Therefore, metal artifacts from MDRs may potentially lead to decreased accuracy of the radiation treatment plan. However, concerns about having MDRs included in the radiation field are addressed by using a 3–5 mm thick mouthpiece as a spacer to avoid dose alteration areas [5–8] and adding MRI to identify the TVs and the OARs [8–10].
Based on these considerations, we assumed that there was no difference in the local control rate and the incidence rate or severity of oral mucositis between MDR removal and non-MDR removal. Thus, we used a cost-minimization analysis for this preliminary study. Table 2 shows the typical dental and medical fee points for each required process for non-MDR removal and MDR removal. Based on Table 2, the public medical care costs were estimated. Table 3 shows the minimum estimated public medical care costs of non-MDR removal and MDR removal. The mean cost per person was estimated to be 121 720 yen for MDR removal and 54 940 yen for non-MDR removal. Moreover, for all patients who received head and neck radiotherapy with MDR removal, the public medical care cost per year was estimated at a total of 671 894 400 yen. Alternatively, if all patients received head and neck radiotherapy with non-MDR removal, the public medical care cost was 303 268 800 yen. Therefore, the difference in the public medical care cost between MDR removal and non-MDR removal was estimated to be 368 625 600 yen. Based on our estimated results, it is suggested that the non-MDR removal as a measure against MDRs for head and neck radiotherapy is more cost-effective than MDR removal. However, our study did not consider the costs of working time and effort of HU replacement to delineate the TVs and OARs in radiotherapy treatment planning with non-MDR and, although the probability is lower than for computed tomography (CT), MRI may generate metal-induced artifacts. Therefore, it is believed that consensus from medical professionals involved in head and neck radiotherapy planning, such as radiation oncologists, medical physicists and radiation treatment technologists, would be necessary at the least.
Table 2.
Typical dental and medical fee points of each procedure required for non-MDR removal and MDR removal
| Non-MDR removal | MDR removal | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| The public medical care fee point (points) | |||
| Fabrication of mouthpiece | Removal of MDR | ||
| Dental impression | 222 | Dental crown | 42 |
| Oral device | 1500 | Dental bridge | 126 |
| Fitting fee | 150 | ||
| Refabrication of MDR | |||
| MRI examination | Dental crown | ||
| MRI (1.5–3.0 Tesla) | 1330 | Crown preparation | 166 |
| Computer diagnosis addition | 450 | Dental impression fee | 64 |
| Digital image addition | 120 | Bite registration fee | 18 |
| Crown restoration material fee | 1187 | ||
| Setting fee | 45 | ||
| Setting material fee | 10 | ||
| Dental bridge | |||
| Crown preparation (two teeth) | 332 | ||
| Dental impression fee | 282 | ||
| Bite registration fee | 76 | ||
| Retainer | 100 | ||
| Crown restoration material fee (two teeth) | 2166 | ||
| Pontic fee | 1278 | ||
| Setting fee | 150 | ||
| Setting material fee (two teeth) | 20 | ||
MDR = metal dental restoration, MRI = magnetic resonance imaging.
The MDR material, impression method and setting material were assumed to be an Au–Pd full metal crown, a combined impression and a standard glass ionomer cement, respectively. In addition, the refabricated dental crowns and dental bridges were assumed to be the molar crowns and the bridge between the second premolar and second molar that had the first molar missing, respectively.
Table 3.
Estimated public medical care costs per person and the total public medical care cost per year
| Non-MDR removal (two devices, one MRI scan) | MDR removal (4.1 crowns, 1.3 bridges) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| The public medical care cost per person (yen) | |||
| Fabrications of mouthpieces | Removals of MDRs | ||
| Dental impression | 4440 | Dental crowns | 1720 |
| Oral device | 30 000 | Dental bridges | 1640 |
| Fitting fee | 1500 | ||
| Refabrications of MDRs | |||
| MRI examination | Dental crowns | ||
| MRI (1.5–3.0 Tesla) | 13 300 | Crown preparation | 6810 |
| Computer diagnosis addition | 4500 | Dental impression fee | 2620 |
| Digital image addition | 1200 | Bite registration fee | 740 |
| Crown restoration material fee | 48 670 | ||
| Setting fee | 1850 | ||
| Setting material fee | 410 | ||
| Dental bridges | |||
| Crown preparation | 44 320 | ||
| Dental impression fee | 34 670 | ||
| Bite registration fee | 990 | ||
| Retainer | 1300 | ||
| Crown restoration material fee | 28 160 | ||
| Pontic fee | 16 610 | ||
| Setting fee | 1950 | ||
| Setting material fee | 260 | ||
| Total | 54 940 | Total | 121 720 |
| The total public medical care cost a year (yen, n = 5520) | |||
| 303 268 800 | 671 894 400 | ||
| The difference between non-MDR removal and MDR removal for total public medical cost per year | |||
| 368 625 600 | |||
MDR = metal dental restoration, MRI = magnetic resonance imaging.
The MDR material, impression method and setting material were assumed to be an Au–Pd full metal crown, a combined impression and a standard glass ionomer cement, respectively. In addition, the refabricated dental crowns and dental bridges were assumed to be the molar crowns and the bridge between the second premolar and second molar that had the first molar missing, respectively.
According to the 2019 Trends in Medical Care Expenditure of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare [15], the national medical care expenditure and the national dental care expenditure in terms of the public medical care cost were ~43.6 trillion yen and 3.2 trillion yen, respectively. The estimated difference in public medical care cost between MDR removal and non-MDR removal was <0.00001% of the national medical care expenditure and <0.0002% of the national dental care expenditure, thereby having a minor influence on these care expenditures. However, the estimated difference in public medical care cost between MDR removal and non-MDR removal per person (66 780 yen) was 19.4% of the national medical care expenditure per person (345 000 yen) and 2.8 times the national dental care expenditure per person (24 000 yen). Therefore, it is believed that the estimated difference in public medical care cost between MDR removal and non-MDR removal is an issue that should be considered.
It has been reported that patients with head and neck cancer generally have a poor oral health status [16, 17]. A previous study in Japan reported that removal of MDRs for head and neck radiation therapy required the removal of an average of 14.4 teeth per person [18]. This number was higher than the number used in our study to estimate the public medical care cost. Therefore, the actual difference in the public medical care cost between MDR removal and non-MDR removal may be even higher than estimated. Additionally, this previous study also reported that dental visits for the removal of MDRs required from 2 to 4 days (mean 3.4 days) [18]. Alternatively, the maximum time for dental visits for mouthpiece fabrication and MRI scans was 3 days; thus, it was also suggested that a patient’s burden associated with visits for non-MDR removal was less than that required for MDR removal.
Some professional societies [7, 8] have recommended non-MDR removal as a measure against MDRs for head and neck radiotherapy without addressing MDR removal. On the other hand, the radiotherapy planning guidelines of JASTRO recommend both non-MDR removal and MDR removal, and provide specifics about each process. This may be because the Japanese public healthcare insurance system is a universal health insurance system, and a patient’s self-pay ratio of medical care cost is relatively low.
In a systematic literature review of the economic burden of head and neck cancer, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was associated with significantly higher total treatment costs than conventional radiotherapy and surgery [19]. Nevertheless, IMRT has been selected as the treatment method in many cases, because it has the potential for higher tumor control or lower treatment-related complications with IMRT. Our study suggests that non-MDR removal may be more cost-effective than MDR removal as a measure for MDRs for head and neck radiotherapy. However, it is necessary to evaluate whether the difference in public medical care cost between them is acceptable. Therefore, in the future, a national survey and cost-effectiveness analysis via a multicenter study are necessary; these investigations should include various outcomes such as the rate of local control, status of oral mucositis, frequency of hospital visits and efforts of the medical professionals.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Enago (www.enago.jp) for their English language review.
Contributor Information
Kouji Katsura, Department of Oral Radiology, Niigata University Medical and Dental Hospital, Japan; Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry and Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata University, Japan.
Yoshihiko Soga, Division of Hospital Dentistry, Okayama University Hospital, Japan.
Sadatomo Zenda, Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Japan.
Hiromi Nishi, Department of General Dentistry, Hiroshima University Hospital, Japan.
Marie Soga, Department of Oral Radiology, Niigata University Medical and Dental Hospital, Japan.
Masatoshi Usubuchi, Department of Dentistry, Miyagi Cancer Center, Japan.
Sachiyo Mitsunaga, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Japan.
Ken Tomizuka, Department of Dentistry, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Japan.
Tetsuhito Konishi, Department of Dentistry, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Japan.
Wakako Yatsuoka, Dental Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Japan.
Takao Ueno, Dental Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Japan.
Tadanobu Aragaki, Division of Dentistry and Oral Surgery, Gunma Prefectural Cancer Center, Japan.
Takafumi Hayashi, Department of Oral Radiology, Niigata University Medical and Dental Hospital, Japan; Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry and Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata University, Japan.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There are no conflicts of interest to declare.
FUNDING
This work was supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C), grant no. 17 K11664.
PRESENTATION AT A CONFERENCE
This study was presented at the 6th annual meeting of the Japanese Association of Oral Supportive Care in Cancer (JAOSCC) on 5–6 December 2020.
References
- 1. Wang R, Boyle A. A convenient method for guarding against localized mucositis during radiation therapy. J Prosthodont 1994;3:198–201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Katsura K, Oral AK. Dental healthcare for oral cancer patients: planning, management, and dental treatment. In: Kirita T, Omura K (eds). Oral Cancer—Diagnosis and Therapy. Tokyo: Springer, 2015, 345–60. [Google Scholar]
- 3. Kovacs DG, Rechner LA, Appelt AL et al. Metal artefact reduction for accurate tumour delineation in radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2018;126:479–86. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Hansen CR, Christiansen RL, Lorenzen EL et al. Contouring and dose calculation in head and neck cancer radiotherapy after reduction of metal artifacts in CT images. Acta Oncol 2017;56:874–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Kamomae T, Itoh Y, Okudaira K et al. Dosimetric impact of dental metallic crown on intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for head and neck cancer. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2016;17:234–45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Katsura K, Utsunomiya S, Abe E et al. A study on a dental device for the prevention of mucosal dose enhancement caused by backscatter radiation from dental alloy during external beam radiotherapy. J Radiat Res 2016;57:709–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Allan E, Lu L, Hamedani H et al. Dosimetric verification of dental stent efficacy in head and neck radiation therapy using modern radiation therapy techniques: quality of life and treatment compliance implications. J Radiat Oncol 2016;5:351–8. [Google Scholar]
- 8. 2018 Update on Radiation Treatment for Head/Neck Cancer. https://www.astro.org/uploadedFiles/_MAIN_SITE/Meetings_and_Education/ASTRO_Meetings/2018/Annual_Refresher/Content_Pieces/2018RefresherHeadNeck.pdf (3 November 2020, date last accessed).
- 9. Merlotti A, Alterio D, Vigna-Taglianti R et al. Technical guidelines for head and neck cancer IMRT on behalf of the Italian association of radiation oncology–head and neck working group. Radiat Oncol 2014;9:264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Setton J, Poon I, Riaz N et al. Oropharyngeal carcinoma. In: Lee NY, Riaz N, Lu JJ (eds). Target Volume Delineation for Conformal and Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy. Heidelberg: Springer, 2015, 17–29. [Google Scholar]
- 11. Yoshimura R. Head and neck . Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology (ed). JASTRO Guidelines 2020 for Radiotherapy Treatment Planning. Tokyo: KANAHARA, 2020, 98–158. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Hashimoto S, Iwata H, Hagino H et al. Development of new variable mouthpiece for radiotherapy using 3D-printer. Jastro Newslett 2020;136:14–5. [Google Scholar]
- 13. Chang KP, Lin WT, Shiau AC et al. Dosimetric distribution of the surroundings of different dental crowns and implants during LINAC photon irradiation. Radiat Phys Chem 2014;104:339–44. [Google Scholar]
- 14. Kim Y, Tomé WA, Bal M et al. The impact of dental metal artifacts on head and neck IMRT dose distributions. Radiother Oncol J Eur Soc Ther Radiol Oncol 2006;79:198–202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. 2019 Changes in Medical Care Expenditure of the Ministry of Health . https://www.mhlw.go.jp/topics/medias/year/19/dl/iryouhi_data.pdf (22 December 2020, date last accessed).
- 16. Critchlow SB, Morgan C, Leung T. The oral health status of pre-treatment head and neck cancer patients. Br Dent J 2014;216:E1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Jham BC, Reis PM, Miranda EL et al. Oral health status of 207 head and neck cancer patients before, during and after radiotherapy. Clin Oral Investig 2008;12:19–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Uehara S, Kobayashi H, Kamata T et al. Usefulness of removing dental metal in intensity modulated radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Head Neck Cancer 2012;38:442–6 (in Japanese). [Google Scholar]
- 19. Wissinger E, Griebsch I, Lungershausen J et al. The economic burden of head and neck cancer: a systematic literature review. Pharmacoeconomics 2014;32:865–82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]