Thomas E Delea1, Carol Hawkes2, Mayur M Amonkar3, Konstantinos Lykopoulos4, Stephen R D Johnston5. 1. Policy Analysis Inc. (PAI), Brookline, MA, USA. 2. GlaxoSmithKline, Uxbridge, UK. 3. GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, PA, USA. 4. GlaxoSmithKline, GSK House, Brentford, London, UK. 5. Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the EGF30008 and TAnDEM (TrAstuzumab in Dual HER2 ER-positive Metastatic breast cancer) trials, anti-HER2 therapy plus an aromatase inhibitor (lapatinib + letrozole (LAP + LET) and trastuzumb + anastrozole (TZ + ANA), respectively) improved time to progression versus aromatase inhibitor monotherapy (LET and ANA, respectively) in post-menopausal women with previously untreated hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and HER2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: A partitionedsurvival analysis model using data from EGF30008 and published results of TAnDEM and other literature was used to evaluate the incremental direct medical cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with LAP + LET versus LET, ANA, and TZ + ANA in post-menopausal women with previously untreated HR+ and HER2+ metastatic breast cancer from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. RESULTS: Incremental costs for LAP + LET are £ 34,737 versus LET, £ 35,995 versus ANA, and £ 5,513 versus TZ + ANA. Corresponding QALYs gained are 0.467, 0.601, and 0.252 years. Cost/QALY gained with LAP + LET is £ 74,448 versus LET, £ 59,895 versus ANA, and £ 21,836 versus TZ + ANA. Given a threshold of £ 30,000/QALY, the estimated probability that LAP + LET is cost-effective is 1.4% versus LET, 9.2% versus ANA, and 51% versus TZ + ANA. CONCLUSIONS: Based on criteria for the evaluation of health technologies in the UK (£ 30,000/QALY), LAP + LET is not likely to be cost-effective versus aromatase inhibitor monotherapy but may be cost-effective versus TZ + ANA, although the latter comparison is associated with substantial uncertainty.
BACKGROUND: In the EGF30008 and TAnDEM (TrAstuzumab in Dual HER2 ER-positive Metastatic breast cancer) trials, anti-HER2 therapy plus an aromatase inhibitor (lapatinib + letrozole (LAP + LET) and trastuzumb + anastrozole (TZ + ANA), respectively) improved time to progression versus aromatase inhibitor monotherapy (LET and ANA, respectively) in post-menopausal women with previously untreated hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and HER2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: A partitionedsurvival analysis model using data from EGF30008 and published results of TAnDEM and other literature was used to evaluate the incremental direct medical cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with LAP + LET versus LET, ANA, and TZ + ANA in post-menopausal women with previously untreated HR+ and HER2+ metastatic breast cancer from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. RESULTS: Incremental costs for LAP + LET are £ 34,737 versus LET, £ 35,995 versus ANA, and £ 5,513 versus TZ + ANA. Corresponding QALYs gained are 0.467, 0.601, and 0.252 years. Cost/QALY gained with LAP + LET is £ 74,448 versus LET, £ 59,895 versus ANA, and £ 21,836 versus TZ + ANA. Given a threshold of £ 30,000/QALY, the estimated probability that LAP + LET is cost-effective is 1.4% versus LET, 9.2% versus ANA, and 51% versus TZ + ANA. CONCLUSIONS: Based on criteria for the evaluation of health technologies in the UK (£ 30,000/QALY), LAP + LET is not likely to be cost-effective versus aromatase inhibitor monotherapy but may be cost-effective versus TZ + ANA, although the latter comparison is associated with substantial uncertainty.
Authors: H Mouridsen; M Gershanovich; Y Sun; R Pérez-Carrión; C Boni; A Monnier; J Apffelstaedt; R Smith; H P Sleeboom; F Jänicke; A Pluzanska; M Dank; D Becquart; P P Bapsy; E Salminen; R Snyder; M Lassus; J A Verbeek; B Staffler; H A Chaudri-Ross; M Dugan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-05-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Bonneterre; A Buzdar; J M Nabholtz; J F Robertson; B Thürlimann; M von Euler; T Sahmoud; A Webster; M Steinberg Journal: Cancer Date: 2001-11-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: N Fleeman; A Bagust; A Boland; R Dickson; Y Dundar; M Moonan; J Oyee; M Blundell; H Davis; A Armstrong; N Thorp Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2011 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: J Bonneterre; B Thürlimann; J F Robertson; M Krzakowski; L Mauriac; P Koralewski; I Vergote; A Webster; M Steinberg; M von Euler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-11-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Angelo Di Leo; Henry L Gomez; Zeba Aziz; Zanete Zvirbule; Jose Bines; Michael C Arbushites; Stephanie F Guerrera; Maria Koehler; Cristina Oliva; Steven H Stein; Lisa S Williams; Judy Dering; Richard S Finn; Michael F Press Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-10-27 Impact factor: 44.544
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