BACKGROUND: Bisphosphonates are recommended to prevent skeletal related events (SREs) in patients with breast cancer and bone metastases (BCBM). However, their clinical and economic profiles vary from one agent to the other. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using modeling techniques, we simulated from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service (NHS) the cost and quality adjusted survival (QALY) associated with five commonly-used bisphosphonates or no therapy in this patient population. The simulation followed patients into several health states (i.e. alive or dead, experiencing an SRE or no SRE, and receiving first or second line therapy). Drugs costs, infusion costs, SREs costs, and utility values were estimated from published sources. Utilities were applied to time with and without SREs to capture the impact on quality of life. RESULTS: Compared to no therapy, all bisphosphonates are either cost saving or highly cost-effective (with a cost per QALY < or = 6126 pounds sterlings). Within this evaluation, zoledronic acid was more effective and less expensive than all other options. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our model, the use of bisphosphonates in breast cancer patients with bone metastases should lead to improved patient outcomes and cost savings to the NHS and possibly other similar entities.
BACKGROUND:Bisphosphonates are recommended to prevent skeletal related events (SREs) in patients with breast cancer and bone metastases (BCBM). However, their clinical and economic profiles vary from one agent to the other. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using modeling techniques, we simulated from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service (NHS) the cost and quality adjusted survival (QALY) associated with five commonly-used bisphosphonates or no therapy in this patient population. The simulation followed patients into several health states (i.e. alive or dead, experiencing an SRE or no SRE, and receiving first or second line therapy). Drugs costs, infusion costs, SREs costs, and utility values were estimated from published sources. Utilities were applied to time with and without SREs to capture the impact on quality of life. RESULTS: Compared to no therapy, all bisphosphonates are either cost saving or highly cost-effective (with a cost per QALY < or = 6126 pounds sterlings). Within this evaluation, zoledronic acid was more effective and less expensive than all other options. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our model, the use of bisphosphonates in breast cancerpatients with bone metastases should lead to improved patient outcomes and cost savings to the NHS and possibly other similar entities.
Authors: Rebecca Anne Miksad; Kuan-Chi Lai; Thomas Benton Dodson; Sook-Bin Woo; Nathaniel Simon Treister; Omosalewa Akinyemi; Marian Bihrle; Guy Maytal; Meredith August; G Scott Gazelle; J Shannon Swan Journal: Oncologist Date: 2011-01-06