OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy as front-line treatment for patients with Stage III epithelial ovarian cancer following optimal primary cytoreductive surgery. METHODS: Based on Gynecologic Oncology Group protocols #172 and #158, a decision analysis model was created to compare two treatment strategies for patients with optimal residual disease Stage III ovarian cancer: (1) inpatient intravenous paclitaxel (24 h) and intraperitoneal cisplatin plus outpatient intraperitoneal paclitaxel chemotherapy (IP/IV), and (2) outpatient intravenous paclitaxel (3 h) and carboplatin chemotherapy (IV/IV). The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated from the perspective of society. RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness analysis revealed that the strategy of IP/IV chemotherapy had an overall cost per patient of $39,861 and effectiveness of 5.16 QALYs compared to $18,822 and 4.59 QALYs for IV/IV chemotherapy. The IP/IV chemotherapy strategy was associated with an additional 0.56 QALYs at an incremental cost of $21,039. The incremental C/E ratio for IP/IV chemotherapy was $37,454/QALY. Inpatient treatment accounted for 43.2% of the cost of IP/IV chemotherapy. Sensitivity analysis testing confirmed the robustness of the model. CONCLUSIONS: In this model, IP/IV chemotherapy was associated with a modest extension in quality-adjusted survival time but was also more costly than IV/IV chemotherapy. On balance, the IP/IV strategy can be considered a good healthcare value. However, these data also suggest that efforts to reduce the cost of IP/IV chemotherapy, such as through development of an ambulatory regimen with equivalent therapeutic efficacy but an improved toxicity profile, would improve the overall value of this adjuvant treatment program.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy as front-line treatment for patients with Stage III epithelial ovarian cancer following optimal primary cytoreductive surgery. METHODS: Based on Gynecologic Oncology Group protocols #172 and #158, a decision analysis model was created to compare two treatment strategies for patients with optimal residual disease Stage III ovarian cancer: (1) inpatient intravenous paclitaxel (24 h) and intraperitoneal cisplatin plus outpatient intraperitoneal paclitaxel chemotherapy (IP/IV), and (2) outpatient intravenous paclitaxel (3 h) and carboplatin chemotherapy (IV/IV). The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated from the perspective of society. RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness analysis revealed that the strategy of IP/IV chemotherapy had an overall cost per patient of $39,861 and effectiveness of 5.16 QALYs compared to $18,822 and 4.59 QALYs for IV/IV chemotherapy. The IP/IV chemotherapy strategy was associated with an additional 0.56 QALYs at an incremental cost of $21,039. The incremental C/E ratio for IP/IV chemotherapy was $37,454/QALY. Inpatient treatment accounted for 43.2% of the cost of IP/IV chemotherapy. Sensitivity analysis testing confirmed the robustness of the model. CONCLUSIONS: In this model, IP/IV chemotherapy was associated with a modest extension in quality-adjusted survival time but was also more costly than IV/IV chemotherapy. On balance, the IP/IV strategy can be considered a good healthcare value. However, these data also suggest that efforts to reduce the cost of IP/IV chemotherapy, such as through development of an ambulatory regimen with equivalent therapeutic efficacy but an improved toxicity profile, would improve the overall value of this adjuvant treatment program.
Authors: Victor R Grann; Priya R Patel; Judith S Jacobson; Ellen Warner; Daniel F Heitjan; Maxine Ashby-Thompson; Dawn L Hershman; Alfred I Neugut Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-07-20 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Insiya B Poonawalla; Rohan C Parikh; Xianglin L Du; Helena M VonVille; David R Lairson Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Kai Jie Chen; Wan Yi Chen; Xia Chen; Yi Ming Jia; Gui Qin Peng; Li Chen Journal: Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet Date: 2013-05-17 Impact factor: 2.441
Authors: John K Chan; Thomas J Herzog; Lilian Hu; Bradley J Monk; Tuyen Kiet; Kevin Blansit; Daniel S Kapp; Xinhua Yu Journal: Oncologist Date: 2014-04-10
Authors: Lisa M Hess; William E Brady; Laura J Havrilesky; David E Cohn; Bradley J Monk; Lari Wenzel; David Cella Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2012-10-30 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Thanasak Sueblinvong; Rahel Ghebre; Yoshie Iizuka; Stefan E Pambuccian; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Amy P N Skubitz; Martina Bazzaro Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-30 Impact factor: 3.240