BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In the recent X-ACT (Xeloda in Adjuvant Colon cancer Therapy) trial, oral capecitabine (Xeloda) demonstrated superior efficacy and an improved safety profile compared with infused fluorouracil + leucovorin (folinic acid) [FU+LV] in patients with Dukes' C colorectal cancer. We used the X-ACT results to determine the cost effectiveness of capecitabine compared with FU+LV from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: Medical resource use data were collected throughout the treatment period. Unit costs for drug administration, hospitalization, emergency room visits and concomitant medications were obtained using Italian published sources. A health-state transition model was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-month (QALM) gains in the intent-to-treat population (1004 and 983 patients in the capecitabine and FU+LV arms, respectively). Costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3.5%. Costs were calculated in euros (2005 values). RESULTS: Administration of capecitabine required fewer clinic visits per patient than FU+LV (7.35 vs 28.0, respectively). Mean acquisition costs per patient for capecitabine were higher than for FU+LV (euro 2533 vs euro 231, respectively), but this difference was offset by the difference in mean chemotherapy administration costs per patient for FU+LV (euro 4338, compared with euro 152 for capecitabine). Mean total hospital days and medication costs for treatment-related adverse events were higher for FU+LV than for capecitabine (euro 352 vs euro 78, respectively). The cost of emergency room visits for the treatment of adverse events did not differ between the treatment groups. With respect to the lifetime horizon, compared with FU+LV, capecitabine is projected to increase QALMs by a mean 6.5 months, with overall cost savings of euro 2234 over the treatment period. These findings show that capecitabine is an economically dominant treatment in this setting. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant capecitabine for patients with Dukes' C colon cancer has the same activity in terms of outcome when compared with FU+LV but is a lower cost option from the economic perspective of the Italian NHS.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In the recent X-ACT (Xeloda in Adjuvant Colon cancer Therapy) trial, oral capecitabine (Xeloda) demonstrated superior efficacy and an improved safety profile compared with infused fluorouracil + leucovorin (folinic acid) [FU+LV] in patients with Dukes' C colorectal cancer. We used the X-ACT results to determine the cost effectiveness of capecitabine compared with FU+LV from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: Medical resource use data were collected throughout the treatment period. Unit costs for drug administration, hospitalization, emergency room visits and concomitant medications were obtained using Italian published sources. A health-state transition model was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-month (QALM) gains in the intent-to-treat population (1004 and 983 patients in the capecitabine and FU+LV arms, respectively). Costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3.5%. Costs were calculated in euros (2005 values). RESULTS: Administration of capecitabine required fewer clinic visits per patient than FU+LV (7.35 vs 28.0, respectively). Mean acquisition costs per patient for capecitabine were higher than for FU+LV (euro 2533 vs euro 231, respectively), but this difference was offset by the difference in mean chemotherapy administration costs per patient for FU+LV (euro 4338, compared with euro 152 for capecitabine). Mean total hospital days and medication costs for treatment-related adverse events were higher for FU+LV than for capecitabine (euro 352 vs euro 78, respectively). The cost of emergency room visits for the treatment of adverse events did not differ between the treatment groups. With respect to the lifetime horizon, compared with FU+LV, capecitabine is projected to increase QALMs by a mean 6.5 months, with overall cost savings of euro 2234 over the treatment period. These findings show that capecitabine is an economically dominant treatment in this setting. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant capecitabine for patients with Dukes' C colon cancer has the same activity in terms of outcome when compared with FU+LV but is a lower cost option from the economic perspective of the Italian NHS.
Authors: Hans-Joachim Schmoll; Thomas Cartwright; Josep Tabernero; Marek P Nowacki; Arie Figer; Jean Maroun; Timothy Price; Robert Lim; Eric Van Cutsem; Young-Suk Park; Joseph McKendrick; Claire Topham; Gemma Soler-Gonzalez; Filipo de Braud; Mark Hill; Florin Sirzén; Daniel G Haller Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: A de Gramont; J F Bosset; C Milan; P Rougier; O Bouché; P L Etienne; F Morvan; C Louvet; T Guillot; E François; L Bedenne Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: L B Saltz; J V Cox; C Blanke; L S Rosen; L Fehrenbacher; M J Moore; J A Maroun; S P Ackland; P K Locker; N Pirotta; G L Elfring; L L Miller Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-09-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Chris Twelves; Alfred Wong; Marek P Nowacki; Markus Abt; Howard Burris; Alfredo Carrato; Jim Cassidy; Andrés Cervantes; Jan Fagerberg; Vassilis Georgoulias; Fares Husseini; Duncan Jodrell; Piotr Koralewski; Hendrik Kröning; Jean Maroun; Norbert Marschner; Joseph McKendrick; Marek Pawlicki; Riccardo Rosso; Johannes Schüller; Jean-François Seitz; Borut Stabuc; Jerzy Tujakowski; Guy Van Hazel; Jerzy Zaluski; Werner Scheithauer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-06-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: I Chau; A R Norman; D Cunningham; D Tait; P J Ross; T Iveson; M Hill; T Hickish; F Lofts; D Jodrell; A Webb; J R Oates Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2005-02-02 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: W Scheithauer; J McKendrick; S Begbie; M Borner; W I Burns; H A Burris; J Cassidy; D Jodrell; P Koralewski; E L Levine; N Marschner; J Maroun; P Garcia-Alfonso; J Tujakowski; G Van Hazel; A Wong; J Zaluski; C Twelves Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: J Cassidy; J-Y Douillard; C Twelves; J J McKendrick; W Scheithauer; I Bustová; P G Johnston; K Lesniewski-Kmak; S Jelic; G Fountzilas; F Coxon; E Díaz-Rubio; T S Maughan; A Malzyner; O Bertetto; A Beham; A Figer; P Dufour; K K Patel; W Cowell; L P Garrison Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2006-04-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: J M Vieitez; R García-Carbonero; J Aparicio; J Feliu; E González-Flores; E Grande; T Pérez-Hoyos; A Salud; E Torres; M Valero; M Valladares-Ayerbes; E Díaz-Rubio Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Enrico Aitini; Anna Rossi; Patrizia Morselli; Beatrice Vivorio; Alessandra Bruschi; Chiara Bottura; Giorgio L Colombo Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 3.989