Advanced malignant melanoma successfully treated with dacarbazine following anti‐PD‐1/CTLA‐4 treatment

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsushi Narahira ◽  
Teruki Yanagi ◽  
Shinya Kitamura ◽  
Takuya Maeda ◽  
Hiroo Hata ◽  
...  
2001 ◽  
Vol 63 (5) ◽  
pp. 561-568
Author(s):  
Hideki KAMIYA ◽  
Hiroyuki KANOH ◽  
Naoki ICHIHASHI ◽  
Yoshiro ICHIKI ◽  
Hajime TAKAGI ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 2166-2173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo Nicholaou ◽  
Lisa M. Ebert ◽  
Ian D. Davis ◽  
Grant A. McArthur ◽  
Heather Jackson ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Eisen ◽  
José Thomas ◽  
Wilson H. Miller ◽  
Martin Gore ◽  
Pascal Wolter ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 1425-1431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dian-Jun Chen ◽  
Xiao-Song Li ◽  
Hui Zhao ◽  
Yan Fu ◽  
Huan-Rong Kang ◽  
...  

1993 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
C H. Borel ◽  
E. Vuillemin ◽  
A. Benhammouda ◽  
M. Weil ◽  
G. Auclerc ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 617-618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan J. Sullivan ◽  
Nageatte Ibrahim ◽  
Donald P. Lawrence ◽  
Julie Aldridge ◽  
Anita Giobbie‐Hurder ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 607-610 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Cure ◽  
P. Souteyrand ◽  
R. Ouabdesselam ◽  
H. Roche ◽  
A. Ravaud ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. e014880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Pike ◽  
Vida Hamidi ◽  
Ingvil Saeterdal ◽  
Jan Odgaard-Jensen ◽  
Marianne Klemp

ObjectiveTo assess the relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of seven new drugs (cobimetinib, dabrafenib, ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, trametinib and vemurafenib) used for treatment of patients with advanced malignant melanoma in the Norwegian setting.DesignA multiple technology assessment.PatientsPatients with advanced malignant melanoma aged 18 or older.Data sourcesA systematic search for randomised controlled trials in relevant bibliographic databases.MethodsWe performed network meta-analyses using both direct and indirect evidence with dacarbazine as a common comparator. We ranked the different treatments in terms of their likelihood of leading to the best results for each endpoint. The cost-utility analysis was based on a probabilistic discrete-time Markov cohort model. The model calculated the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) with different treatment strategies from a healthcare perspective. Sensitivity analysis was performed by means of Monte Carlo simulation.ResultsMonotherapies with a programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint-inhibitor had a higher probability of good performance for overall survival than monotherapies with ipilimumab or BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The combination treatments had all similar levels of effectiveness to the PD-1 immune-checkpoint-inhibitors.PD-1 immune-checkpoint-inhibitors are more effective and more costly compared with ipilimumab in monotherapy. Nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab had higher costs and the same level of effectiveness as the PD-1 immune-checkpoint-inhibitors in monotherapy.BRAF/MEK inhibitor combinations (dabrafenib and trametinib or vemurafenib and cobimetinib) had both similar effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; however, the combination therapies are more likely to give higher quality adjusted life year gains than BRAF or MEK inhibitor monotherapies, but to a higher cost.ConclusionsNone of the drugs investigated can be considered cost-effective at what has normally been considered a reasonable willingness-to-pay (WTP) in Norway. Price reductions (from the official list prices) in the region of 63%–84% would be necessary for these drugs to be cost-effective at a WTP of €55 850 per QALY.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document