Literature DB >> 26850287

A global economic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of new treatments for advanced breast cancer in Canada.

C Beauchemin1, N Letarte1,2, K Mathurin1, L Yelle3, J Lachaine1.   

Abstract

Objective Considering the increasing number of treatment options for metastatic breast cancer (MBC), it is important to develop high-quality methods to assess the cost-effectiveness of new anti-cancer drugs. This study aims to develop a global economic model that could be used as a benchmark for the economic evaluation of new therapies for MBC. Methods The Global Pharmacoeconomics of Metastatic Breast Cancer (GPMBC) model is a Markov model that was constructed to estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) of new treatments for MBC from a Canadian healthcare system perspective over a lifetime horizon. Specific parameters included in the model are cost of drug treatment, survival outcomes, and incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AEs). Global parameters are patient characteristics, health states utilities, disutilities, and costs associated with treatment-related AEs, as well as costs associated with drug administration, medical follow-up, and end-of-life care. The GPMBC model was tested and validated in a specific context, by assessing the cost-effectiveness of lapatinib plus letrozole compared with other widely used first-line therapies for post-menopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) MBC. Results When tested, the GPMBC model led to incremental cost-utility ratios of CA$131 811 per QALY, CA$56 211 per QALY, and CA$102 477 per QALY for the comparison of lapatinib plus letrozole vs letrozole alone, trastuzumab plus anastrozole, and anastrozole alone, respectively. Results of the model testing were quite similar to those obtained by Delea et al., who also assessed the cost-effectiveness of lapatinib in combination with letrozole in HR+/HER2 + MBC in Canada, thus suggesting that the GPMBC model can replicate results of well-conducted economic evaluations. Conclusions The GPMBC model can be very valuable as it allows a quick and valid assessment of the cost-effectiveness of any new treatments for MBC in a Canadian context.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Advanced breast cancer; Cost-effectiveness; Cost-utility; Markov model

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26850287     DOI: 10.3111/13696998.2016.1151431

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Econ        ISSN: 1369-6998            Impact factor:   2.448


  9 in total

1.  Cost-utility of Sunitinib Versus Pazopanib in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Canada using Real-world Evidence.

Authors:  Sara Nazha; Simon Tanguay; Anil Kapoor; Michael Jewett; Christian Kollmannsberger; Lori Wood; G A Georg Bjarnason; Daniel Heng; Denis Soulières; Martin Neil Reaume; Naveen Basappa; Eric Lévesque; Alice Dragomir
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 2.859

2.  Cost-Effectiveness of Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Pediatric Relapsed/Refractory B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.

Authors:  Reith R Sarkar; Nicholas J Gloude; Deborah Schiff; James D Murphy
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  Systematic Review of the Cost Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Prevention, Screening, and Treatment Interventions.

Authors:  Jinani Jayasekera; Jeanne S Mandelblatt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 4.  Reviewing the quality, health benefit and value for money of chemotherapy and targeted therapy for metastatic breast cancer.

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

5.  The Clinical and Economic Impact of Inaccurate EGFR Mutation Tests in the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Mindy M Cheng; John F Palma; Sidney Scudder; Nick Poulios; Oliver Liesenfeld
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2017-06-28

6.  The value of decreasing the duration of the infectious period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

Authors:  Bruce Y Lee; Sarah M Bartsch; Marie C Ferguson; Patrick T Wedlock; Kelly J O'Shea; Sheryl S Siegmund; Sarah N Cox; James A McKinnell
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 4.475

7.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of EGFR Mutation Testing And Afatinib Versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin As First-Line Therapy For Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer In China.

Authors:  Ruxu You; Jinyu Liu; David Bin-Chia Wu; XinYu Qian; Boxiang Lyu; Yu Zhang; Nan Luo
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 3.989

8.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Abemaciclib Plus Fulvestrant in the Second-Line Treatment of Women With HR+/HER2- Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer: A US Payer Perspective.

Authors:  Yingcheng Wang; Mingjun Rui; Xin Guan; Yingdan Cao; Pingyu Chen
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-06-02

9.  Model-Based Biomarker Selection for Dose Individualization of Tyrosine-Kinase Inhibitors.

Authors:  Maddalena Centanni; Lena E Friberg
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 5.810

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.