Literature DB >> 19130218

Cost-utility analysis for advanced breast cancer therapy in Germany: results of the fulvestrant sequencing model.

Michael Patrick Lux1, M Hartmann, C Jackisch, G Raab, A Schneeweiss, K Possinger, J Oyee, N Harbeck.   

Abstract

Therapy decisions in advanced breast cancer (ABC) increasingly require assessment not only of treatment efficacy but also of cost-effectiveness. To this end, we performed a cost-utility analysis by comparing treatment sequences including/omitting fulvestrant in a hypothetical population of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) postmenopausal women with ABC. The analysis was performed from the German health care perspective. Using a first-order sequential Markov model, expected costs and utilities were calculated over a time horizon of 10 years for cohorts of patients with HR+ ABC, previously treated for at least 5 years using adjuvant endocrine therapies. Utilities were primarily quantified in terms of quality adjusted life years (QALY). "Base-case" estimates of state transition rates, resource utilization, and other model parameters were derived from published evidence and expert assessment. The impacts of uncertainties in all key model parameters were evaluated by sensitivity analysis. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3% annually. Including second-line fulvestrant in the treatment sequence led to greater estimated health gains (0.021 QALY) and cost savings of 564 euros ($745, 380 pounds) per patient, i.e. the fulvestrant-containing sequence was "dominant". The prediction of a cost savings was robust with respect to variations in all key parameters. The probability of acceptable cost-effectiveness for the fulvestrant sequence was 72% at a willingness to pay (WTP) of 30,000 euros/QALY ($39,621/QALY, 20,198 pounds/QALY); the probability was even higher at lower WTP and substantially exceeded 50% for any realistic WTP. In a representative population of women with HR+ advanced breast cancer, inclusion of fulvestrant in the treatment sequence provides a cost-effective alternative from the German health care perspective. A high probability of cost-effectiveness is maintained under variations in all key parameters. The results reflect a tendency for patients receiving fulvestrant at an early stage to maintain high quality of life for a longer interval.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19130218     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-008-0294-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  10 in total

1.  Cost-Benefit Analysis of Endocrine Therapy in the Adjuvant Setting for Postmenopausal Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer, Based on Survival Data and Future Prices for Generic Drugs in the Context of the German Health Care System.

Authors:  Michael P Lux; Claudia Reichelt; Jon Karnon; Thorsten D Tänzer; Dragan Radosavac; Peter A Fasching; Matthias W Beckmann; Falk C Thiel
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2011-10-13       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 2.  Fulvestrant: a review of its use in the management of hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Jamie D Croxtall; Kate McKeage
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2011-02-12       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Abemaciclib plus Fulvestrant versus Placebo plus Fulvestrant in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive, ERBB2-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Qian Xie; Hanrui Zheng; Qiu Li
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2021-09-09       Impact factor: 2.268

Review 4.  Use of Intermediate Endpoints in the Economic Evaluation of New Treatments for Advanced Cancer and Methods Adopted When Suitable Overall Survival Data are Not Available.

Authors:  Catherine Beauchemin; Marie-Ève Lapierre; Nathalie Letarte; Louise Yelle; Jean Lachaine
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Estimating the potential annual welfare impact of innovative drugs in use in Switzerland.

Authors:  Matea Pavic; Alena M Pfeil; Thomas D Szucs
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2014-05-20

6.  Economic Evaluation of Fulvestrant 500 mg Compared to Generic Aromatase Inhibitors in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer in Sweden.

Authors:  Ugne Sabale; Mattias Ekman; Daniel Thunström; Claire Telford; Christopher Livings
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2017-12

7.  Accounting for Capacity Constraints in Economic Evaluations of Precision Medicine: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Stuart J Wright; William G Newman; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  German value sets for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a cancer-specific utility instrument based on the EORTC QLQ-C30.

Authors:  Georg Kemmler; Eva Gamper; Virginie Nerich; Richard Norman; Rosalie Viney; Bernhard Holzner; Madeleine King
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Breast cancer attributable costs in Germany: a top-down approach based on sickness funds data.

Authors:  Emil Victor Gruber; Stephanie Stock; Björn Stollenwerk
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-10       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Quantitative Evidence Synthesis Methods for the Assessment of the Effectiveness of Treatment Sequences for Clinical and Economic Decision Making: A Review and Taxonomy of Simplifying Assumptions.

Authors:  Ruth A Lewis; Dyfrig Hughes; Alex J Sutton; Clare Wilkinson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-11-26       Impact factor: 4.981

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.