scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of sorafenib versus best supportive care in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in Egypt

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gihan Hamdy Elsisi ◽  
Yousery Nada ◽  
Noha Rashad ◽  
João Carapinha
2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 669-675 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis ◽  
Pedro N. Aguiar ◽  
Mónica L. Cordón ◽  
Yanin Chavarri-Guerra ◽  
Gilberto de Lima Lopes

Background: Treatment options are limited for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that progresses after treatment with sorafenib. Cabozantinib, an oral small molecule inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinase receptors, recently showed improved overall survival (OS) compared with placebo in sorafenib-pretreated patients with advanced HCC in the CELESTIAL trial. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib for second-line treatment of patients with advanced HCC from a US healthcare system perspective. Patients and Methods: Cost and utility data were extracted from the CELESTIAL trial and used to determine the cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib compared with placebo plus best supportive care. The main outcome of this study was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained by using cabozantinib compared with placebo plus best supportive care in sorafenib-pretreated HCC. Results: In the base-case analysis using data from the CELESTIAL trial, the incremental QALY and ICER were 0.067 and $1,040,675 for cabozantinib compared with placebo and best supportive care. OS reported in the CELESTIAL trial (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63–0.92) had the strongest association with the ICER. In one-way sensitivity analyses, there were no scenarios in which cabozantinib was cost-effective. In a cost-threshold analysis, cabozantinib would have to be priced at least $50 per pill to be cost-effective considering a willingness to pay of $100,000 per QALY. Although the CELESTIAL trial demonstrated that cabozantinib improves OS compared with placebo in patients with HCC that progresses after treatment with sorafenib, our analysis shows that cabozantinib is not a cost-effective therapy in this scenario. Conclusions: At current costs, cabozantinib is not cost-effective for second-line therapy of HCC in the United States.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 466-466
Author(s):  
Pengfei Yu

466 Background: S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine derivative, has been shown to be clinically effective against hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We carried out a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy of S-1, compared to best supportive care (BSC) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: From 2009.12 to 2013.12, 32 cases of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (the presence of extrahepatic metastasis or locally advanced disease not amenable to surgical resection or other locoregional therapies) were retrospectively analysed. 18 patients received S-1 (80 mg/m2/day, administered during days 1~14 and repeated every 21 days) and 14 patients received best supportive care (BSC). The time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS) and safety were assessed. Results: 17 of 32 (53.1%) patients had metastatic disease, including the retroperitoneal lymph nodes (7 cases), lung (4 cases), supraclavicular lymph nodes (3 cases), abdominal wall (3 cases), brain (2 cases) and adrenal glands (2 cases). 12 patients (37.5%) had portal vein tumor thrombus. The two groups were well matched at baseline. In S-1 group,a total of 63 cycles were administered with median of 3.5 cycles (range, 2~7).The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were thrombocytopenia (28.1%), neutropenia (21.8%), elevated serum aspartate aminotransferase levels (15.6%) and rash (9.4%). A patient (5.6%) had a partial response,11 (61.1%) had stable disease, and 6 (33.3%) had progressive disease. Median TTP was 4.7 months in the S-1 group compared with 2.3 months in the BSC group (P=0.013). Overall survival was 15.1 months in patients treated with S-1, compared with 8.3 months in those who received BSC (P=0.027). Conclusions: S-1 showed an acceptable safety profile and benefit in survival in patients with advanced HCC.The conclusion needs further evaluation in randomized clinical trials.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document