Structured exercise program following adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer: A cost-utility analysis of the CHALLENGE trial

PURPOSE: The phase III CHALLENGE trial (CCTG CO.21) demonstrated that a 3-year structured exercise program (SEP) improved disease-free and overall survival versus health education materials (HEM) in patients with stage III or high-risk stage II colon cancer after surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of the SEP versus HEM. METHODS: This pre-specified economic evaluation used prospectively collected data from all trial participants (n = 889). The base case adopted the Canadian public payer perspective and included direct healthcare costs over a 5-year time horizon with a 1.5% discount rate. 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) outcomes were mapped to Short-Form 6-Dimension (SF-6D) utilities using a validated algorithm. Mean costs (2024 CAD) and effects (life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)) per participant in each intervention group were used to estimate the incremental costs, incremental LYs/QALYs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER, $/life-year gain (LYG)), and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR, $/QALY) when applicable. Uncertainty was assessed via bootstrapping (1,000 samples). Notable scenario analyses included a 10-year time horizon and a societal perspective incorporating lost wages due to missed work, measured through the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. RESULTS: In the base case, despite an up-front cost of $2,917 to provide the exercise sessions, the SEP ($31,957) was dominant over HEM ($33,546), being less costly (-$1,589) and more effective (+0.05 LYs; +0.10 QALYs). The SEP was dominant in 53% of bootstrap samples, and 80% fell below a $50,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Major cost drivers were cancer recurrence or new malignancy and anticancer therapy. Scenario analyses were consistent with the base case. CONCLUSION: The SEP was less costly and more effective than HEM. This study can inform payers and health-systems with implementation of SEPs in routine care.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2026-05-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco-26-00765
Primary Topic
Cancer survivorship and care
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Structured exercise program following adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer: A cost-utility analysis of the CHALLENGE trial

Patti O’Brien, Patricia A. Tang, Matthew C. Cheung, S. Clarke et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Cancer survivorship and care
article

Structured exercise program following adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer: A cost-utility analysis of the CHALLENGE trial

Patti O’Brien, Patricia A. Tang, Matthew C. Cheung, S. Clarke, Neil Chua, K S Courneya, Dongsheng Tu, Derek J. Jonker, Sharlene Gill, Ralph Wong, Matthew E. Burge, John Raymond Zalcberg, Christine Friedenreich, Ralph M. Meyer, Christopher J. O'Callaghan, Howard J. Lim, Haryana M. Dhillon, Shahid Ahmed, Victoria Coyle, Michael Brundage, Annette E. Hay, Kelvin KW. Chan, Ryan WK. Chu, Rebecca KS. Wong, Christopher M. Booth, Janette L. Vardy
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: The phase III CHALLENGE trial (CCTG CO.21) demonstrated that a 3-year structured exercise program (SEP) improved disease-free and overall survival versus health education materials (HEM) in patients with stage III or high-risk stage II colon cancer after surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of the SEP versus HEM. METHODS: This pre-specified economic evaluation used prospectively collected data from all trial participants (n = 889). The base case adopted the Canadian public payer perspective and included direct healthcare costs over a 5-year time horizon with a 1.5% discount rate. 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) outcomes were mapped to Short-Form 6-Dimension (SF-6D) utilities using a validated algorithm. Mean costs (2024 CAD) and effects (life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)) per participant in each intervention group were used to estimate the incremental costs, incremental LYs/QALYs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER, $/life-year gain (LYG)), and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR, $/QALY) when applicable. Uncertainty was assessed via bootstrapping (1,000 samples). Notable scenario analyses included a 10-year time horizon and a societal perspective incorporating lost wages due to missed work, measured through the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. RESULTS: In the base case, despite an up-front cost of $2,917 to provide the exercise sessions, the SEP ($31,957) was dominant over HEM ($33,546), being less costly (-$1,589) and more effective (+0.05 LYs; +0.10 QALYs). The SEP was dominant in 53% of bootstrap samples, and 80% fell below a $50,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Major cost drivers were cancer recurrence or new malignancy and anticancer therapy. Scenario analyses were consistent with the base case. CONCLUSION: The SEP was less costly and more effective than HEM. This study can inform payers and health-systems with implementation of SEPs in routine care.

Journal of Clinical Oncology
Queen's University Belfast (GB), Alberta Health Services (CA), The University of Sydney (AU), Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA), University of British Columbia (CA), University of Alberta (CA), The University of Queensland (AU), University of Calgary (CA), University of Toronto (CA), Queen's University (CA), Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (AU), Concord Repatriation General Hospital (AU), St. Boniface Hospital (CA), Ottawa Hospital (CA), Health Sciences Centre (CA), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA), CancerCare Manitoba (CA), Cooperative Trials Group for Neuro-Oncology (AU), Saskatchewan Cancer Agency (CA), Alfred Health (AU), Monash University (AU), McMaster University (CA)
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Cancer survivorship and care
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.