scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Biomarker-Guided Treatment for Metastatic Gastric Cancer in the Second-Line Setting

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brianna Lauren ◽  
Sassan Ostvar ◽  
Elisabeth Silver ◽  
Myles Ingram ◽  
Aaron Oh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Targeted Therapies ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Effective Strategy ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Life Years

Background. The 5-year survival rate of patients with metastatic gastric cancer (GC) is only 5%. However, trials have demonstrated promising antitumor activity for targeted therapies/immunotherapies among chemorefractory metastatic GC patients. Pembrolizumab has shown particular efficacy among patients with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression and high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of biomarker-guided second-line GC treatment. Methods. We constructed a Markov decision-analytic model using clinical trial data. Our model compared pembrolizumab monotherapy and ramucirumab/paclitaxel combination therapy for all patients and pembrolizumab for patients based on MSI status or PD-L1 expression. Paclitaxel monotherapy and best supportive care for all patients were additional comparators. Costs of drugs, treatment administration, follow-up, and management of adverse events were estimated from a US payer perspective. The primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY over 60 months. Secondary outcomes were unadjusted life years (survival) and costs. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate model uncertainty. Results. The most effective strategy was pembrolizumab for MSI-H patients and ramucirumab/paclitaxel for all other patients, adding 3.8 months or 2.0 quality-adjusted months compared to paclitaxel. However, this strategy resulted in a prohibitively high ICER of $1,074,620/QALY. The only cost-effective strategy was paclitaxel monotherapy for all patients, with an ICER of $53,705/QALY. Conclusion. Biomarker-based treatments with targeted therapies/immunotherapies for second-line metastatic GC patients substantially improve unadjusted and quality-adjusted survival but are not cost-effective at current drug prices.

Apatinib for chemotherapy-refractory advanced metastatic gastric cancer: A cost-effective analysis compared with conventional chemotherapy.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15531-e15531
Author(s):  
Bin Wu ◽  
Te Li ◽  
Yuejuan Xu ◽  
Gang Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Conventional Chemotherapy ◽  
Assistance Program ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Patient Assistance ◽  
Effective Analysis

e15531 Background: Apatinib can improve survival in patients with metastatic gastric cancer (mGC) who do not respond to or who experience progression with second-line chemotherapy. Apatinib Patient Assistance Program (PAP) is implemented for Chinese patients. A cost-effective analysis is needed for apatinib with PAP. Methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate the clinical course of typical patients with chemotherapy-refractory mGC. We estimated 10-year quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). The Clinical efficacy and safety were derived from the pivotal phase II and III trials of apatinib. Direct costs were estimated from the perspective of Chinese health care system. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Scenario analysis for Patient Assistance Program (PAP) was checked. Results: Baseline analysis showed that the apatinib increased the cost and QALYs by $7,859 and 0.191, respectively, relative to conventional chemotherapy, resulting in an ICER of $40,997/QALY gained. The ICER was $21,132/QALY when 3+X PAP (paying for 3 months following free donation until disease progressed) was available. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed that apatinib with 3+X PAP achieved nearly two 2/3 likelihood of cost-effectiveness under the Chinese willingness-to-pay threshold of $ 22,200 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analyses found that the utility of progression-free survival was the most influential factor with respect to the robustness of the model. Budget impact analysis estimated that the annual increase in fiscal expenditures would be approximately 0.45 million dollars. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that apatinib is likely to be cost-effective in patients with chemotherapy-refractory mGC when 3+X PAP is available.

Second-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer in the era of predictive biomarkers: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15517-e15517
Author(s):  
Brianna Lauren ◽  
Elisabeth Silver ◽  
Myles Ingram ◽  
Aaron Oh ◽  
Lindsay Kumble ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Best Supportive Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Effective Strategy ◽  
Second Line

e15517 Background: Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality, with only a 30% five-year survival rate. Patients who progress after one round of systemic therapy face an especially poor prognosis. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines include both pembrolizumab (PEM) and ramucirumab plus paclitaxel (RAM/PAC) as second-line (2L) therapy for gastric cancer based on data from the Phase II KEYNOTE-059 and Phase III RAINBOW trials, respectively. Recently, the Phase III KEYNOTE-061 trial reported on the effectiveness of PEM for patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). Given the high prices of targeted therapies, it is important to determine if cost-effectiveness is possible using personalized treatment strategies. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of these regimens in both the general patient population and specific biomarker populations. Methods: A decision-analytic (Markov) model was constructed using data from the KEYNOTE-059, KEYNOTE-061, RAINBOW, and REGARD trials. The analysis compared PEM and RAM/PAC for all patients, as well as PEM for patients based on MSI status or PD-L1 expression (combined positive score of 1% or 10%) in the 2L setting. Comparators were paclitaxel monotherapy (PAC) for all patients and best supportive care (BSC) for all patients. Costs (USD) and utility values were estimated from Medicare and the literature. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000. Results: The only cost-effective strategy was PAC monotherapy for all patients, with an ICER of $53,705/QALY. PEM for MSI-H patients and RAM/PAC for microsatellite stable patients was the most effective strategy (greatest QALYs), but was not cost-effective with an ICER of $1,074,620/QALY. Conclusions: Despite their effectiveness, PEM and RAM/PAC are not cost-effective as 2L treatments for metastatic gastric cancer. Although personalizing treatment based on biomarkers improved cost-effectiveness, the ICERs surpassed the WTP threshold at current drug prices.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the microprocessor-controlled knee C-Leg in transfemoral amputees with and without diabetes mellitus

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Kuhlmann ◽  
Henning Krüger ◽  
Susanne Seidinger ◽  
Andreas Hahn
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Input Parameter ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Transfemoral Amputees ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The safe use of a prosthesis in activities of daily living is key for transfemoral amputees. However, the number of falls varies significantly between different prosthetic device types. This study aims to compare medical and economic consequences of falls in transfemoral amputees who use the microprocessor-controlled knee joint C-Leg with patients who use non-microprocessor-controlled (mechanical) knee joints (NMPK). The main objectives of the analysis are to investigate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of C-Legs in transfemoral amputees with diabetes mellitus (DM) and without DM in Germany. Methods A decision-analytic model was developed that took into account the effects of prosthesis type on the risk of falling and fall-related medical events. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses were performed separately for transfemoral amputees with and without DM. The study took the perspective of the statutory health insurance (SHI). Input parameters were derived from the published literature. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to investigate the impact of changes in individual input parameter values on model outcomes and to explore parameter uncertainty. Results C-Legs reduced the rate of fall-related hospitalizations from 134 to 20 per 1000 person years (PY) in amputees without DM and from 146 to 23 per 1000 PY in amputees with DM. In addition, the C-Leg prevented 15 or 14 fall-related death per 1000 PY. Over a time horizon of 25 years, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 16,123 Euro per quality-adjusted life years gained (QALY) for amputees without DM and 20,332 Euro per QALY gained for amputees with DM. For the period of 2020–2024, the model predicted an increase in SHI expenditures of 98 Mio Euro (53 Mio Euro in prosthesis users without DM and 45 Mio Euro in prosthesis users with DM) when all new prosthesis users received C-Legs instead of NMPKs and 50% of NMPK user whose prosthesis wore out switched to C-Legs. Results of the PSA showed moderate uncertainty and a probability of 97–99% that C-Legs are cost-effective at an ICER threshold of 40,000 Euro (≈ German GDP per capita in 2018) per QALY gained. Conclusion Results of the study suggest that the C-Leg provides substantial additional health benefits compared with NMPKs and is likely to be cost-effective in transfemoral amputees with DM as well as in amputees without DM at an ICER threshold of 40,000 Euro per QALY gained.

scholarly journals PD-L1 Test-Based Strategy With Nivolumab as the Second-Line Treatment in Advanced NSCLC： A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiao Liu ◽  
Xia Luo ◽  
Zhen Zhou ◽  
Liubao Peng ◽  
Lidan Yi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Price Reduction ◽  
Chinese Patients ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Impact

ObjectiveOur previous economic assessment found that nivolumab was not cost-effective for Chinese patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and without EGFR mutations or ALK translocations, when compared with the standard second-line drug docetaxel. However, a greater survival benefit with nivolumab was observed for patients with 1% or greater tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. In view of this, we designed the present analysis to explore whether it is cost-effective to use the PD-L1 test to guide second-line nivolumab treatment in China.Material and MethodsA Markov model was established to project the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of three second-line treatment strategies: nivolumab and docetaxel (strategies without a PD-L1 test) and PD-L1 test-based strategy. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of our results. Additional price reduction and willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold scenario analyses were performed to explore the impact of economic and health policies with Chinese characteristics on our results.ResultsThe PD-L1 test-based strategy costs approximately CNY 194,607 (USD 28,210) or more and yielded an additional 0.27 QALYs compared to the docetaxel strategy without a PD-L1 test, equating an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CNY 731,089 (USD 105,978)/QALY. Deterministic sensitivity analyses showed that the price of nivolumab was the strongest source of variation in the ICERs. Probability sensitivity analysis showed that the probability for the PD-L1 test-based strategy being cost-effective increases with the increase of WTP thresholds.ConclusionFrom the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, using a PD-L1 test to guide second-line nivolumab treatment was not cost-effective. The National Healthcare Security Administration negotiation on the price reduction of nivolumab was found to be the most effective action to improve its cost-effectiveness in China.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Helicobacter pylori screening in prevention of gastric cancer in Chinese

2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (01) ◽  
pp. 87-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Xie ◽  
Nan Luo ◽  
Gord Blackhouse ◽  
Ron Goeree ◽  
Hin-Peng Lee
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Helicobacter Pylori ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Model Simulation ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Public Healthcare ◽  
Effective Strategy ◽  
Cost Effective Strategy ◽  
Life Years

Objectives:The aim of this study was to evaluate the costs and effectiveness associated with no screening,Helicobacter pyloriserology screening, and the13C-urea breath test (UBT) for gastric cancer in the Chinese population.Methods:A Markov model simulation was carried out in Singaporean Chinese at 40 years of age (n= 478,500) from the perspective of public healthcare providers. The main outcome measures were costs, number of gastric cancer cases prevented, life-years saved, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained from the screening age to death, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), which were compared among the three strategies. The uncertainty surrounding ICERs was addressed by scenario analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation.Results: The ICER of serology screening versus no screening was $25,881 per QALY gained (95 percent confidence interval (95 percent CI), $5,700 to $120,000). The ICER of UBT versus no screening was $53,602 per QALY gained (95 percent CI, $16,000 to $230,000). ICER of UBT versus serology screening was $470,000 per QALY gained, for which almost all random samples of the ICERs distributed above $50,000 per QALY.Conclusions: It cannot be confidently concluded that eitherH pyloriscreening was a cost-effective strategy compared with no screening in all Chinese at the age of 40 years. Nevertheless, serology screening has demonstrated much more potential to be a cost-effective strategy, especially in the population with higher gastric cancer prevalence.

Ixazomib (IXA), carfilzomib (CAR), elotuzumab (ELO) or daratumumab (DAR) with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (LEN+DEX) versus LEN+DEX only in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM): A comparative cost-effectiveness analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8043-8043
Author(s):  
Mavis Obeng-Kusi ◽  
Daniel Arku ◽  
Neda Alrawashdh ◽  
Briana Choi ◽  
Nimer S. Alkhatib ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Treatment Comparison ◽  
Comparative Cost ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years

8043 Background: IXA, CAR, ELO and DARin combination with LEN+DEXhave been found superior in efficacy compared to LEN+DEX in the management of R/R MM. Applying indirect treatment comparisons from a network meta-analysis (NMA), this economic evaluation aimed to estimate the comparative cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of these four triplet regimens in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: In the absence of direct treatment comparison from a single clinical trial, NMA was used to indirectly estimate the comparative PFS benefit of each regimen. A 2-state Markov model simulating the health outcomes and costs was used to evaluate PFS life years (LY) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) with the triplet regimens over LEN+DEX and expressed as the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) and cost-utility ratios (ICUR). Probability sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the influence of parameter uncertainty on the model. Results: The NMA revealed that DAR+LEN+DEX was superior to the other triplet therapies, which did not differ statistically amongst them. As detailed in the Table, in our cost-effectiveness analysis, all 4 triplet regimens were associated with increased PFSLY and PFSQALY gained (g) over LEN+DEX at an additional cost. DAR+LEN+DEX emerged the most cost-effective with ICER and ICUR of $667,652/PFSLYg and $813,322/PFSQALYg, respectively. The highest probability of cost-effectiveness occurred at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $1,040,000/QALYg. Conclusions: Our economic analysis shows that all the triplet regimens were more expensive than LEN +DEX only but were also more effective with respect to PFSLY and PFSQALY gained. Relative to the other regimens, the daratumumab regimen was the most cost-effective.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Cost-utility Analysis of Second-generation Direct-acting Antivirals for Hepatitis C

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdollah Poursamad ◽  
Zahra Goudarzi ◽  
Iman Karimzadeh ◽  
Nahid Jallaly ◽  
Khosro Keshavarz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Genotype 1 ◽  
Medication Regimen ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Medication Therapy ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Study Results

Background: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) can lead to increased mortality, disability, and liver transplantation if left untreated, and it is associated with a possible increase in disease burden in the future, all of which would surely have a significant impact on the health system. New antiviral regimens are effective in the treatment of the disease yet expensive. Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of three medication regimens, namely, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF), velpatasvir/sofosbuvir, and daclatasvir/sofosbuvir (DCV/SOF) for HCV patients with genotype 1 in Iran. Methods: A Markov model with a lifetime horizon was developed to predict the costs and outcomes of the three mentioned medication therapy strategies. The final outcome of the study was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), which was obtained using the previously published studies. The study was conducted from the perspective of the Health Ministry; therefore, only direct medical costs were estimated. The results were provided as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY. Ultimately, the one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to measure the strength of study results. Results: The results showed that the QALYs for LDV/SOF, DCV/SOF, and VEL/SOF were 13.25, 13.94, and 14.61, and the costs were 4,807, 7,716, and 4,546$, respectively. The VEL/SOF regimen had lower costs and higher effectiveness than the LDV/SOF and DCV/SOF regimens, making it a dominant strategy. The tornado diagram results showed that the study results had the highest sensitivity to chronic hepatitis C (CHC) and compensated cirrhosis (CC) state costs. Moreover, the scatter plots showed that the VEL/SOF was the dominant therapeutic strategy in 73% of the simulations compared to LDV/SOF and 66% of the simulations compared to DCV/SOF; moreover, it was in the acceptable region in 92% of the simulations and below the threshold. Therefore, it was considered the most cost-effective strategy. Moreover, the results showed that DCV/SOF was in the acceptable region below the threshold in 69% of the simulations compared to LDV/SOF. Therefore, the DCV/SOF regimen was more cost-effective than LDV/SOF. Conclusions: According to the present study results, it is suggested that the VEL/SOF regimen be used as the first line of therapy in patients with HCV genotype 1. Moreover, DCV/SOF can be the second-line medication regimen.

scholarly journals Cladribine tablets are a cost-effective strategy in high-disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis patients in Iran

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nayyereh Ayati ◽  
Lora Fleifel ◽  
Mohammad Ali Sahraian ◽  
Shekoufeh Nikfar
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
High Disease Activity ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis Patients ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis

Background: Cladribine tablets are the foremost oral immune-reconstitution therapy for high disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis (HDA-RMS). We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of cladribine tablets compared to natalizumab in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran. Methods: A 5-year cohort-based Markov model was developed with 11 expanded disability status score (EDSS) health states, including patients with HDA-RMS as on and off-treatment. All costs were identified from the literature and expert opinion and were measured in Iranian Rial rates, changed to the 2020 USD rate and were discounted by 7.2%. Quality adjusted life years (QALY), discounted by 3.5%, and life years gained (LYG) were adopted to measure efficacy. The final results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio that was compared to a national willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of 1 to 3 gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (D/PSA) were employed to evaluate uncertainty. Results: Cladribine tablets dominated natalizumab and yielded 6,607 USD cost-saving and 0.003 additional QALYs per patient. LYG was comparable. The main cost component was drug acquisition cost in both arms. DSA indicated the sensitivity of the results to the cost discount rates and also the patients’ body weight; while they were less sensitive to the main clinical variables. PSA indicated that cladribine tablets were cost-effective in Iran, with a probability of 57.5% and 58.6% at lower and higher limits of threshold, respectively. Conclusion: Cladribine tablets yielded higher QALYs and lower costs compared to natalizumab, in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of genomic profiling in early breast cancer in Colombia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo Rojas ◽  
María Rojas-Reyes ◽  
Diego Rosselli ◽  
Andres F. Cardona
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
National Health System ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
United States Dollar ◽  
Life Years

Abstract BackgroundThe best strategy to establish indication for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer (EBC) in Colombia is unknown. This study aimed to identify the cost-effectiveness of various strategies to establish the necessity of adjuvant chemotherapy.MethodsThis study used an adapted decision-analytic model to compare cost and outcomes of care that includes Oncotype DX™ (ODX) or Mammaprint™ (MMP) test with routine care without ODX or MMP tests (application of adjuvant chemotherapy for all patients) over a 5-year time horizon, and the from the perspective of the Colombian National Health System (NHS) perspective (payer). Data were obtained from published literature and clinical trial database. The study population was composed of women with EBC, hormone-receptor positive (HR+), Her2-negative, lymph-node negative (LN0), with high-risk clinical criteria for recurrence. The outcome measures were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; 2019 United States Dollar [USD] per quality-adjusted life years [QALY] gained) and net monetary benefit (NMB).ResultsODX increases QALYs by 0.05 and MMP by 0.03 with savings of $2,445 and $570 compared with the standard strategy, respectively. The ICER for ODX was −$41,857 and that for MMP was −$18,253 per QALY; NMB was $2,821 and $771, respectively. Both tests were cost effective under defined threshold. When the two tests were compared, ODX was more cost effective than MMP. Sensitivity analysis revealed that, with a threshold of 1 GDP per capita, ODX will be cost effective in 95.5% of the cases compared with 70.2% of MMP. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that ODX was a consistently superior strategy.ConclusionsGenomic profiling using ODX or MMP tests to define the need of adjuvant chemotherapy treatment in patients with HR + and Her2 − EBC is a cost-effective strategy that allows Colombian NHS saving money.

scholarly journals Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Eribulin Mesylate as a Treatment for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Spain: Management in the Later Line of Therapy

10.36469/9834 ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-193
Author(s):  
Gabriel Tremblay ◽  
Unnati Majethia ◽  
Ilias Kontoudis ◽  
Jesús De Rosendo
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Background: Two thirds (62%) of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients in Western Europe have human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative disease, for which anthracyclines and taxanes are recommended as first-line treatments, followed by microtubule-targeting agents such as capecitabine, vinorelbine and/or eribulin. The study objective was to compare the cost-effectiveness of eribulin in Spain as a second-line treatment for HER2-negative MBC with its current status as a third-line treatment for patients who have received capecitabine. Methods: A Markov model was developed from the perspective of the Spanish healthcare system. The model had three health states: Stable; Progression and Death. In Stable, patients received eribulin or: capecitabine and vinorelbine for HER2-negative patients; primary treatment of physician’s choice (TPC) for post-capecitabine patients. In Progression, all patients received secondary TPC. Model inputs were overall survival, progression-free survival and costs relating to chemotherapies, grade 3/4 adverse events and healthcare utilization. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify uncertainty. Results: As second-line treatment, Eribulin was associated with a greater incremental benefit in life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than capecitabine and vinorelbine. Erubilin as third-line treatment was associated with greater benefit in life years (LYs) and QALYs than TPC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for eribulin were higher in the second-line than the third-line setting in terms of LYs (€35,149 versus €24,884) and QALYs (€37,152 versus €35,484). In both settings, deterministic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the ICER is most sensitive to the eribulin price. Conclusion: Eribulin is cost-effective as second-line treatment for HER2-negative MBC patients in Spain; albeit, slightly less so than as third-line treatment for MBC patients who have received capecitabine (an ICER per QALY difference of €1,668). This difference may fall within the margin of error for the model and could potentially be addressed by a minor reduction in the eribulin price.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document