Z M Khan1, K L Rascati, J M Koeller. 1. College of Pharmacy, University of Texas at Austin, USA. zmk85058@glaxowellcome.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct an economic analysis on the use of carboplatin versus cisplatin over multiple courses in patients with lung [nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC)] or ovarian cancer. DESIGN: This 1-year study was a prospective, multicentre, cost-minimisation evaluation. Direct medical resource utilisation and costs associated with carboplatin and cisplatin administration over 3 to 6 courses of treatment were measured and compared. The perspective of this evaluation was that of the payer. SETTING: A convenience sample of 16 sites representing a mix of cancer centres, outpatient clinics, medical centres and managed-care sites in a general practice oncology setting participated. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients were included in this study if they were newly diagnosed with NSCLC, SCLC or ovarian cancer, had not received prior chemotherapy, received either carboplatin or cisplatin as their treatment (additional chemotherapy agents were allowed), and received at least 3 courses of carboplatin or cisplatin therapy up to a maximum of 6 courses. Patients receiving more than 6 courses of therapy were included in this study, but data collection on those patients stopped after the sixth course. Individuals involved with data collection at all sites were trained via on-site and/or teleconference training. Site visits were made to assure reliability of at least 0.80. Data were collected and compiled via a fax transmission process that scans directly through optical mark and character recognition into a computer database. Outcome measures included costs of: medications, emergency room visits, physician/clinic/laboratory visits, home healthcare visits, transfusions, special procedures, consultations, hospitalisations and other/miscellaneous costs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: Of 220 patients, 164 met the study criteria (response rate = 74.2%) with 95 patients in the carboplatin group (NSCLC = 45, SCLC = 18, ovarian = 32) and 69 in the cisplatin group (NSCLC = 36, SCLC = 21, ovarian = 12). The average number of courses were: NSCLC = 4.3 and 4.2, SCLC = 4.3 and 4.8, and ovarian = 4.7 and 5.1, respectively, for carboplatin and cisplatin. The total costs (treatment and toxicity) associated with the use of carboplatin were higher in NSCLC, similar in SCLC but lower in ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that overall treatment costs may vary depending on cancer type, even when the same drugs are used. The total costs (treatment plus toxicity costs) associated with the use of carboplatin were higher than those of cisplatin in patients with NSCLC, similar in SCLC, but lower in ovarian cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct an economic analysis on the use of carboplatin versus cisplatin over multiple courses in patients with lung [nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC)] or ovarian cancer. DESIGN: This 1-year study was a prospective, multicentre, cost-minimisation evaluation. Direct medical resource utilisation and costs associated with carboplatin and cisplatin administration over 3 to 6 courses of treatment were measured and compared. The perspective of this evaluation was that of the payer. SETTING: A convenience sample of 16 sites representing a mix of cancer centres, outpatient clinics, medical centres and managed-care sites in a general practice oncology setting participated. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS:Patients were included in this study if they were newly diagnosed with NSCLC, SCLC or ovarian cancer, had not received prior chemotherapy, received either carboplatin or cisplatin as their treatment (additional chemotherapy agents were allowed), and received at least 3 courses of carboplatin or cisplatin therapy up to a maximum of 6 courses. Patients receiving more than 6 courses of therapy were included in this study, but data collection on those patients stopped after the sixth course. Individuals involved with data collection at all sites were trained via on-site and/or teleconference training. Site visits were made to assure reliability of at least 0.80. Data were collected and compiled via a fax transmission process that scans directly through optical mark and character recognition into a computer database. Outcome measures included costs of: medications, emergency room visits, physician/clinic/laboratory visits, home healthcare visits, transfusions, special procedures, consultations, hospitalisations and other/miscellaneous costs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: Of 220 patients, 164 met the study criteria (response rate = 74.2%) with 95 patients in the carboplatin group (NSCLC = 45, SCLC = 18, ovarian = 32) and 69 in the cisplatin group (NSCLC = 36, SCLC = 21, ovarian = 12). The average number of courses were: NSCLC = 4.3 and 4.2, SCLC = 4.3 and 4.8, and ovarian = 4.7 and 5.1, respectively, for carboplatin and cisplatin. The total costs (treatment and toxicity) associated with the use of carboplatin were higher in NSCLC, similar in SCLC but lower in ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that overall treatment costs may vary depending on cancer type, even when the same drugs are used. The total costs (treatment plus toxicity costs) associated with the use of carboplatin were higher than those of cisplatin in patients with NSCLC, similar in SCLC, but lower in ovarian cancer.
Authors: D S Alberts; S Green; E V Hannigan; R O'Toole; D Stock-Novack; P Anderson; E A Surwit; V K Malvlya; W A Nahhas; C J Jolles Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1992-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: H Anderson; J Wagstaff; D Crowther; R Swindell; M J Lind; J McGregor; M S Timms; D Brown; P Palmer Journal: Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol Date: 1988-09