[Quality criteria for cost-benefit analysis in oncologic nuclear medicine and state of its realization]

Additional or expensive diagnostic imaging had to prove prospectively their diagnostic efficacy, their therapeutic efficacy, or their patient-outcome efficacy. The adherence to methodologic standards in the cost-effectiveness literature is required. Based on the bone scintigraphy in oncologic patients with a low prevalence of bone metastases, the cost-effectiveness is questionable. The economic role of 99m-Tc MIBI mammoscintigraphy and of the imaging for carcinomas of unknown origin is discussed controversially. Based on the reimbursement of the positron emission tomography (PET) in the USA and in Switzerland, cost-effectiveness literature and decision trees for cost-utility analyses are reviewed. PET imaging was cost-effective in non-small-cell lung cancer, in solitary pulmonary nodules, in recurrent colorectal cancer, in metastatic melanoma and in recurrent head and neck cancer with reduced costs of management. The German health insurance calls for PET-data based on the national reimbursement.