Health economic analysis of doublet chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab for first-line treatment of RAS mutant metastatic colorectal cancer based on real-world data.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16048-e16048
Author(s):  
Koen Degeling ◽  
Hui-Li Wong ◽  
Amanda Pereira-Salgado ◽  
Suzanne Kosmider ◽  
Rachel Wong ◽  
...  

e16048 Background: Bevacizumab remains the dominant biologic treatment option for RAS mutant (RASmt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). While the health economic impact of bevacizumab in the RASmt subpopulation may deviate from its use in the general mCRC population, this has never been investigated. This study uses the power of real-world data to assess the cost-effectiveness of doublet chemotherapy with compared to without bevacizumab (ChemBev and ChemOnly, respectively) for first-line treatment of RASmt mCRC, while accounting for subsequent treatment in second and third line. Methods: Data from the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry was analyzed to populate a discrete event simulation of three treatment lines, surgery of primary tumor and metastases, hospitalizations following serious adverse events, and best supportive care. Imbalance in baseline patient and disease characteristics was corrected for in all analyses using inverse probability weights. Costs were included from an Australian public payer perspective in Australian dollars (AUD). All health and economic outcomes were discounted at 5% per year. Results: Of the 507 included RASmt mCRC patients that started first-line treatment in the 2010 – 2017 time period, 345 received ChemBev and 162 ChemOnly. The corrected median time on first-line treatment was 7.1 months (95% confidence interval: 6.4 – 8.0) for ChemBev and 4.1 months (3.5 – 5.1) for ChemOnly. Time on second- and third-line treatment was comparable between the groups. Corrected overall survival was 22.6 months (21.7 – 24.0) for ChemBev and 14.3 months (12.1 – 21.7) for ChemOnly. In terms of the health economic impact, mean life years were 1.9 for ChemBev and 1.5 for ChemOnly, and mean costs were AUD 93,025 and AUD 44,929 per patient, respectively. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ChemBev compared to ChemOnly was AUD 149,317 per life-year gained (LYG). Conclusions: In contrast to results from clinical trials, overall survival was substantially longer for patients who received bevacizumab, which can possibly be attributed to an imbalance between groups despite correction for known prognostic factors. At an ICER of AUD 149,317 per LYG, the economic burden of upfront treatment with bevacizumab was found to be substantial and consistent with estimates for the general mCRC population. This is mainly caused by the duration of first-line treatment, which was significantly longer for ChemBev.

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e030738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huijuan Wang ◽  
Lingfei Huang ◽  
Peng Gao ◽  
Zhengyi Zhu ◽  
Weifeng Ye ◽  
...  

ObjectivesCetuximab plus leucovorin, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-4) is superior to FOLFOX-4 alone as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with RAS wild-type (RAS wt mCRC), with significantly improved survival benefit by TAILOR, an open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase III trial. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness of these two regimens remains uncertain. The following study aims to determine whether cetuximab combined with FOLFOX-4 is a cost-effective regimen for patients with specific RAS wt mCRC in China.DesignA cost-effectiveness model combined decision tree and Markov model was built to simulate pateints with RAS wt mCRC based on health states of dead, progressive and stable. The health outcomes from the TAILOR trial and utilities from published data were used respectively. Costs were calculated with reference to the Chinese societal perspective. The robustness of the results was evaluated by univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ParticipantsThe included patients were newly diagnosed Chinese patients with fully RAS wt mCRC.InterventionsFirst-line treatment with either cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 or FOLFOX-4.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcomes are costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).ResultsBaseline analysis disclosed that the QALYs was increased by 0.383 caused by additional cetuximab, while an increase of US$62 947 was observed in relation to FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy. The ICER was US$164 044 per QALY, which exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of US$28 106 per QALY.ConclusionsDespite the survival benefit, cetuximab combined with FOLFOX-4 is not a cost-effective treatment for the first-line regime of patients with RAS wt mCRC in China.Trial registration numberTAILOR trial (NCT01228734); Post-results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document