Tamer Refaat1, Mehee Choi, Germaine Gaber, Krystyna Kiel, Minesh Mehta, William Gradishar, William Small. 1. Departments of *Radiation Oncology ∥Medicine-Hematology/Oncology, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine §Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL †Department of Clinical Oncology ‡Clinical Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains an incurable disease despite advances in treatment modalities. In 2008, the FDA approved bevacizumab with paclitaxel for the initial treatment of HER2-negative MBC. The approval was then officially revoked by the FDA in November 2011. However, both the European Medicines Agency and NCCN still endorse bevacizumab for this indication. One of the greatest challenges facing health care worldwide is reconciling incremental clinical benefits with exponentially rising costs. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab with paclitaxel for HER2-negative MBC. METHODS: A Markov decision tree using Data 3.5 (TreeAge Software Inc.) was created for decision and cost-effectiveness analyses of using bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone as first-line chemotherapy in HER2-negative MBC using efficacy and toxicity data from the E2100 study. The model was designed from the patient and payer perspectives and sensitivity analyses were run. RESULTS: The marginal cost between paclitaxel alone versus bevacizumab and paclitaxel was 86k with a marginal efficacy of 0.369 quality-adjusted life-years and marginal cost effectiveness of 232,720.72 USD. The expected outcome value was 1.86 for bevacizumab and paclitaxel and 1.67 for paclitaxel alone. The combination was not cost effective and only a marginal survival advantage was observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that, despite a significant progression-free survival advantage, the addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel is not cost effective for the cohort of patients with HER2-negative MBC included in our analysis. Such data could be informative to policymakers who consider the health economics and incremental cost-effectiveness of medical therapies.
PURPOSE:Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains an incurable disease despite advances in treatment modalities. In 2008, the FDA approved bevacizumab with paclitaxel for the initial treatment of HER2-negative MBC. The approval was then officially revoked by the FDA in November 2011. However, both the European Medicines Agency and NCCN still endorse bevacizumab for this indication. One of the greatest challenges facing health care worldwide is reconciling incremental clinical benefits with exponentially rising costs. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab with paclitaxel for HER2-negative MBC. METHODS: A Markov decision tree using Data 3.5 (TreeAge Software Inc.) was created for decision and cost-effectiveness analyses of using bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone as first-line chemotherapy in HER2-negative MBC using efficacy and toxicity data from the E2100 study. The model was designed from the patient and payer perspectives and sensitivity analyses were run. RESULTS: The marginal cost between paclitaxel alone versus bevacizumab and paclitaxel was 86k with a marginal efficacy of 0.369 quality-adjusted life-years and marginal cost effectiveness of 232,720.72 USD. The expected outcome value was 1.86 for bevacizumab and paclitaxel and 1.67 for paclitaxel alone. The combination was not cost effective and only a marginal survival advantage was observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that, despite a significant progression-free survival advantage, the addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel is not cost effective for the cohort of patients with HER2-negative MBC included in our analysis. Such data could be informative to policymakers who consider the health economics and incremental cost-effectiveness of medical therapies.
Authors: Van T Nghiem; Riha Vaidya; Gary H Lyman; Dawn L Hershman; Scott D Ramsey; Joseph M Unger Journal: Value Health Date: 2020-10-09 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Tina Bøgelund Kristensen; Malin L T Knutsson; Markus Wehland; Britt Elmedal Laursen; Daniela Grimm; Elisabeth Warnke; Nils E Magnusson Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2014-12-11 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Xavier Ghislain Léon Victor Pouwels; Bram L T Ramaekers; Manuela A Joore Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-07-08 Impact factor: 4.872