Literature DB >> 17261113

Cost-effectiveness of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

Susan Moore1, John Tumeh, Steven Wojtanowski, Christopher Flowers.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a significant problem for cancer patients. Aprepitant, a novel NK-1 receptor antagonist, is approved for use with 5-HT3 antagonists and corticosteroids to prevent CINV associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness of standard aprepitant use has not been established.
METHODS: We developed a Markov model to compare three strategies for CINV: conventional treatment with a 5-HT3 antagonist and a corticosteroid, conventional treatment plus aprepitant, and conventional treatment with aprepitant added after the onset of CINV. Data from published clinical trials provided probabilities and utilities for the model. Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Federal Supply Scale provided costs for medical resources and medications utilized. Resource use data were based on a randomized clinical trial and routine clinical practice. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for each aprepitant strategy was calculated in US$ per healthy day equivalent (HDE) and converted to dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty in model parameters.
RESULTS: Adding aprepitant after CINV occurred cost $264 per HDE ($96,333/QALY). The three-drug strategy cost $267/HDE with a 95% confidence range of $248-$305/HDE ($97,429/QALY; $90,396-$111,239/QALY). In univariate analyses, the most influential factors on the ICER were: the cost of aprepitant, the likelihood of delayed CINV without aprepitant, the likelihood of acute CINV with/without aprepitant, and the increase in HDE from avoiding CINV.
CONCLUSIONS: Aprepitant provides modest incremental benefits compared with conventional management of CINV. Routine aprepitant use appears most cost-effective when the likelihood of delayed CINV or the cost of rescue medications is high.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17261113     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00141.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  17 in total

Review 1.  Aprepitant: a review of its use in the prevention of nausea and vomiting.

Authors:  Monique P Curran; Dean M Robinson
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 9.546

2.  Cost-utility analysis of aprepitant for patients who truly need it in Japan.

Authors:  Ikuto Tsukiyama; Masahiko Ando; Sumiyo Tsukiyama; Masayuki Takeuchi; Masayuki Ejiri; Yusuke Kurose; Hiroko Saito; Ichiro Arakawa; Tadao Inoue; Etsuro Yamaguchi; Akihito Kubo
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Prescription trends of prophylactic antiemetics for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Japan.

Authors:  Ayako Okuyama; Fumiaki Nakamura; Takahiro Higashi
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  A cost-utility analysis of risk model-guided versus physician's choice antiemetic prophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: a net benefit regression approach.

Authors:  Kednapa Thavorn; Doug Coyle; Jeffrey S Hoch; Lisa Vandermeer; Sasha Mazzarello; Zhou Wang; George Dranitsaris; Dean Fergusson; Mark Clemons
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Phase II open label pilot trial of aprepitant and palonosetron for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving moderately emetogenic FOLFOX chemotherapy for the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Joseph S Bubalo; Jon D Herrington; Marc Takemoto; Patricia Willman; Michael S Edwards; Casey Williams; Alan Fisher; Alison Palumbo; Eric Chen; Charles Blanke; Charles D Lopez
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 6.  Pharmacokinetic evaluation of fosaprepitant dimeglumine.

Authors:  Francheska Colon-Gonzalez; Walter K Kraft
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.481

7.  Fosaprepitant and aprepitant: an update of the evidence for their place in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Authors:  Patrick Langford; Paul Chrisp
Journal:  Core Evid       Date:  2010-10-21

8.  Therapeutic and preventive antiemetic effect of aprepitant in Japanese patients with thoracic malignancies who truly need it.

Authors:  Sumiyo Ito; Ikuto Tsukiyama; Masahiko Ando; Masayo Katakami; Rie Hamanaka; Kenshi Kosaka; Ayako Matsubara; Masaki Nishimura; Hiroyuki Tanaka; Nobuhiro Asai; Norihito Yokoe; Ayumu Takahashi; Kenji Baba; Katsuhiko Matsuura; Etsuro Yamaguchi; Akihito Kubo
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-09-17       Impact factor: 3.603

9.  Resource utilization and costs associated with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy administered in the US outpatient hospital setting.

Authors:  Thomas A Burke; Tami Wisniewski; Frank R Ernst
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-01-26       Impact factor: 3.603

10.  Safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability of single-dose fosaprepitant regimen for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Authors:  Luigi Celio; Francesca Ricchini; Filippo De Braud
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 2.711

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.