scholarly journals Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the effectiveness of therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-298
Author(s):  
Yu. Yu. Petukhova ◽  
E. V. Eliseeva ◽  
M. V. Volkov ◽  
O. N. Li ◽  
A. G. Petukhova
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation ◽  
Resource Consumption ◽  
Limited Budget ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Cost

Objective: to perform a pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the effectiveness of therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) based on real practical data on medical help for patients with this disease.Material and methods. The authors performed a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis and the calculation of resource consumption in the application of several options of chemotherapy for mCRC: FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, and FOLFOXIRI; targeted therapy: FOLFOX + bevacizumab, FOLFOX + panitumumab, FOLFIRI + cetuximab, FOLFIRI + aflibercept, regorafenib monotherapy.Results. The cost-effectiveness parameter, calculated as a ratio of the cost of therapy to the median survival without progression, for chemotherapeutic schemes varied from 108 to 167 thousand rubles and for the targeted therapy schemes – from 223 to 930 thousand rubles. The calculation of resource consumption showed that in the case of a limited budget, 100% of patients can be treated by FOLFOX scheme, or 26% of patients by FOLFOX + panitumumab, or 47% of patients by FOLFOX + bevacizumab; and 100% of patients by FOLFIRI scheme or 11.5% of patients by FOLFIRI + cetuximab (aflibercept). Besides, it was established that in the case of a similar budget, 100% of patients with mCRC can be treated by chemotherapy schemes or a limited number of patients with regorafenib.Conclusion. The cost of targeted therapy significantly exceeds the cost of chemotherapeutic schemes. Still, considering the gross domestic product per capita in the Russian Federation, they can be an economically feasible investment and the optimum option of therapy

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab versus TAS-102 monotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kiyoaki Sugiura ◽  
Yuki Seo ◽  
Takayuki Takahashi ◽  
Hideyuki Tokura ◽  
Yasuhiro Ito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Combination Regimen ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background TAS-102 plus bevacizumab is an anticipated combination regimen for patients who have metastatic colorectal cancer. However, evidence supporting its use for this indication is limited. We compared the cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab combination therapy with TAS-102 monotherapy for patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Method Markov decision modeling using treatment costs, disease-free survival, and overall survival was performed to examine the cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab combination therapy and TAS-102 monotherapy. The Japanese health care payer’s perspective was adopted. The outcomes were modeled on the basis of published literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the two treatment regimens was the primary outcome. Sensitivity analysis was performed and the effect of uncertainty on the model parameters were investigated. Results TAS-102 plus bevacizumab had an ICER of $21,534 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained compared with TAS-102 monotherapy. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that TAS-102 monotherapy was more cost-effective than TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination therapy at a willingness-to-pay of under $50,000 per QALY gained. Conclusions TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination therapy is a cost-effective option for patients who have metastatic colorectal cancer in the Japanese health care system.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of UGT1A1*28 Genotyping in Preventing Severe Neutropenia Following FOLFIRI Therapy in Colorectal Cancer.

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solen Pichereau ◽  
Anne Le Louarn ◽  
Thierry Lecomte ◽  
Hélène Blasco ◽  
Chantal Le Guellec ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Febrile Neutropenia ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Severe Neutropenia ◽  
Functional Polymorphisms ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Genotype Screening ◽  
Ugt1a1 Genotype

PURPOSE: Functional polymorphisms of the UGT1A1 gene, particularly the UGT1A1*28 variant, are associated with the severity of the bone marrow suppression in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving irinotecan. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of screening for UGT1A1*28 polymorphism associated with primary prophylactic Granulocytes Colony Stimulating Factor in patients homozygous for the *28 allele. The effectiveness was estimated based on the number of neutropenia avoided. METHODS: We modelled a theoretical population treated with combined 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) for metastatic colorectal cancer. A decision tree simulated the health outcomes, measured by the prevalence of neutropenic events for two strategies, with or without UGT1A1 genotype screening. The model incorporated direct hospital costs and was validated with a sensitivity analysis. We calculated the cost-effectiveness ratio: CE=∆C / ∆E = "genotyping" cost – "no genotyping" cost / number of febrile neutropenia avoided. RESULTS: In the "genotyping strategy", the cost to avoid one febrile neutropenia event per 1000 patients treated was € 942.8 to € 1090.1. The sensitivity analysis showed a better CE ratio of € 733.4 to € 726.6 per febrile neutropenic event avoided.CONCLUSIONS: UGT1A1 genotype screening before irinotecan treatment is a cost-efficient strategy for the hospital. Systematic genotyping prior to chemotherapy, and administration of CSF in patients homozygotes for the *28 allele allow to avoid 91 febrile neutropenias at an acceptable cost.

Cost-effectiveness of regorafenib for pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients in the United States.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 578-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian S. Seal ◽  
Ipek Özer-Stillman ◽  
John Whalen ◽  
Apoorva Ambavane ◽  
Avin Yaldo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Drug Acquisition ◽  
Trial Data ◽  
Administrative Claims ◽  
Heavily Pretreated ◽  
The Cost

578 Background: There is an unmet need for treatments that provide a survival benefit for patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients treated with regorafenib plus best supportive care (BSC) had significant improvement in overall survival (OS) versus patients in the placebo arm receiving BSC alone. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of regorafenib for the treatment of patients with mCRC after failure or intolerance to irinotecan-, oxaliplatin-, and fluorouracil-based regimens, from the perspective of a U.S. health care payer. Methods: A cohort-partition model was developed to simulate treatment costs and survival for patients treated with regorafenib or BSC alone. Survival was projected by fitting Weibull distributions to trial data. Mean duration of treatment (3.0 months regorafenib, 2.1 months BSC), utilities (0.71 on treatment, 0.59 post-treatment) and serious adverse event rates were also based on trial data. Monthly drug monitoring and physician fee costs were based on Medicare fee schedules. Routine mCRC care and adverse event unit costs were obtained from an analysis of administrative claims in two large managed care databases. Costs were estimated in 2012 USD. Results: Patients treated with regorafenib had prolonged survival versus BSC alone (0.75 versus 0.60 years) and also had higher lifetime costs ($97,700 versus $59,494). The improvement in quality-adjusted life years (0.47 versus 0.37) was small due to the heavily pretreated nature of the patient population. The increase in costs was attributable to increases in costs for drug acquisition, adverse events , and routine care from increased survival. Conclusions: Regorafenib increases life expectancy for patients with pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer. The cost of this benefit could be considered high; however, it could be justifiable given high unmet need for these patients. The increase in cost is primarily due to drug acquisition costs, similar to other recent treatments for metastatic cancers.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of fruquintinib for metastatic colorectal cancer third-line treatment in China

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi Peng ◽  
Xingduo Hou ◽  
Yangmu Huang ◽  
Tong Xie ◽  
Xinyang Hua
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Third Line ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Abstract Background: In this study, we analyze the cost-effectiveness of fruquintinib as third-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in China, especially after a recent price drop suggested by the National Healthcare Security Administration. Methods: A Markov model was developed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of fruquintinib compared to placebo among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The Chinese healthcare payer’s perspective was considered with a lifetime horizon, including direct medical cost (2019 US dollars [USD]). A willing‐to‐pay threshold was set at USD 27,130/QALY, which is three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. We examined the robustness of the model in one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.Results: Fruquintinib was associated with better health outcomes than placebo (0.640 vs 0.478 QALYs) with a higher cost (USD 20750.9 vs USD 12042.2), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 53508.7 per QALY. This ICER is 25% lower than the one calculated before the price drop (USD 70952.6 per QALY).Conclusion: After the price negotiation, the drug becomes cheaper and the ICER is lower, but the drug is still not cost effective under the standard of 3 times GDP willing‐to‐pay threshold. For patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in China, fruquintinib is not a cost-effective option under the current circumstances in China.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of fruquintinib for metastatic colorectal cancer third-line treatment in China

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi Peng ◽  
Xingduo Hou ◽  
Yangmu Huang ◽  
Tong Xie ◽  
Xinyang Hua
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life Year ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Third Line ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Abstract Background : In this study, we analyze the cost-effectiveness of fruquintinib as third-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in China, especially after a recent price drop suggested by the National Healthcare Security Administration. Methods : A Markov model was developed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of fruquintinib compared to placebo among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The Chinese healthcare payer’s perspective was considered with a lifetime horizon, including direct medical cost (2019 US dollars [USD]). A willing‐to‐pay threshold was set USD 27,130/QALY, which is 3 times gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. We examined the robustness of the model in one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results : Fruquintinib was associated with better health outcomes than placebo (0.640 vs 0.478 QALYs) with a higher cost (USD 20750.9 vs USD 12042.2), resulting an incremental results effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 53508.7 per QALY. This ICER is 25% lower than the one calculated before the price drop (USD 70952.6 per QALY). Conclusion : After the price negotiation, the drug becomes cheaper and the ICER is lower, but the drug is still not cost effective under the standard of 3 times GDP willing‐to‐pay threshold. For patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in China, fruquintinib is not a cost-effective option under the current circumstances in China.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of fruquintinib for metastatic colorectal cancer third-line treatment in China

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi Peng ◽  
Xingduo Hou ◽  
Yangmu Huang ◽  
Tong Xie ◽  
Xinyang Hua
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Third Line ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Abstract Background In this study, we analyze the cost-effectiveness of fruquintinib as third-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in China, especially after a recent price drop suggested by the National Healthcare Security Administration. Methods A Markov model was developed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of fruquintinib compared to placebo among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The Chinese healthcare payer’s perspective was considered with a lifetime horizon, including direct medical cost (2019 US dollars [USD]). A willing-to-pay threshold was set at USD 27,130/QALY, which is three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. We examined the robustness of the model in one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results Fruquintinib was associated with better health outcomes than placebo (0.640 vs 0.478 QALYs) with a higher cost (USD 20750.9 vs USD 12042.2), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 53508.7 per QALY. This ICER is 25% lower than the one calculated before the price drop (USD 70952.6 per QALY). Conclusion After the price negotiation, the drug becomes cheaper and the ICER is lower, but the drug is still not cost effective under the standard of 3 times GDP willing-to-pay threshold. For patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in China, fruquintinib is not a cost-effective option under the current circumstances in China.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document