Literature DB >> 28408015

Accounting for Cured Patients in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Megan Othus1, Aasthaa Bansal2, Lisel Koepl2, Samuel Wagner3, Scott Ramsey2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Economic evaluations often measure an intervention effect with mean overall survival (OS). Emerging types of cancer treatments offer the possibility of being "cured" in that patients can become long-term survivors whose risk of death is the same as that of a disease-free person. Describing cured and noncured patients with one shared mean value may provide a biased assessment of a therapy with a cured proportion.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to explain how to incorporate the heterogeneity from cured patients into health economic evaluation.
METHODS: We analyzed clinical trial data from patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab (Ipi; n = 137) versus glycoprotein 100 (gp100; n = 136) with statistical methodology for mixture cure models. Both cured and noncured patients were subject to background mortality not related to cancer.
RESULTS: When ignoring cured proportions, we found that patients treated with Ipi had an estimated mean OS that was 8 months longer than that of patients treated with gp100. Cure model analysis showed that the cured proportion drove this difference, with 21% cured on Ipi versus 6% cured on gp100. The mean OS among the noncured cohort patients was 10 and 9 months with Ipi and gp100, respectively. The mean OS among cured patients was 26 years on both arms. When ignoring cured proportions, we found that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) when comparing Ipi with gp100 was $324,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) (95% confidence interval $254,000-$600,000). With a mixture cure model, the ICER when comparing Ipi with gp100 was $113,000/QALY (95% confidence interval $101,000-$154,000).
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports using cure modeling in health economic evaluation in advanced melanoma. When a proportion of patients may be long-term survivors, using cure models may reduce bias in OS estimates and provide more accurate estimates of health economic measures, including QALYs and ICERs.
Copyright © 2017 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cure models; oncology; overall survival; survival analysis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28408015     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  19 in total

1.  Recalibrating Health Technology Assessment Methods for Cell and Gene Therapies.

Authors:  Aris Angelis; Huseyin Naci; Allan Hackshaw
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  A Case Study Examining the Usefulness of Cure Modelling for the Prediction of Survival Based on Data Maturity.

Authors:  Tim S Grant; Darren Burns; Christopher Kiff; Dawn Lee
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Bias in Mean Survival From Fitting Cure Models With Limited Follow-Up.

Authors:  Megan Othus; Aasthaa Bansal; Harry Erba; Scott Ramsey
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 5.725

4.  Assessment of the Cost-Effectiveness of HER2-Targeted Treatment Pathways in the Neoadjuvant Treatment of High-Risk HER2-Positive Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Jesse A Sussell; Joshua A Roth; Craig S Meyer; Anita Fung; Svenn A Hansen
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2022-01-30       Impact factor: 3.845

5.  Out of Date or Best Before? A Commentary on the Relevance of Economic Evaluations Over Time.

Authors:  Gemma E Shields; Becky Pennington; Ash Bullement; Stuart Wright; Jamie Elvidge
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Estimating Lifetime Benefits Associated with Immuno-Oncology Therapies: Challenges and Approaches for Overall Survival Extrapolations.

Authors:  Mario J N M Ouwens; Pralay Mukhopadhyay; Yiduo Zhang; Min Huang; Nicholas Latimer; Andrew Briggs
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Economic Evaluation of Single versus Combination Immuno-Oncology Therapies: Application of a Novel Modelling Approach in Metastatic Melanoma.

Authors:  Eddie J Gibson; Najida Begum; Ian Koblbauer; George Dranitsaris; Danny Liew; Phil McEwan; Yong Yuan; Ariadna Juarez-Garcia; David Tyas; Clive Pritchard
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2020-05-06

8.  Survival Analysis in Patients with Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma Treated with Avelumab.

Authors:  Tereza Lanitis; Irina Proskorovsky; Apoorva Ambavane; Matthias Hunger; Ying Zheng; Murtuza Bharmal; Hemant Phatak
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 3.845

9.  Modelling the Survival Outcomes of Immuno-Oncology Drugs in Economic Evaluations: A Systematic Approach to Data Analysis and Extrapolation.

Authors:  Eddie Gibson; Ian Koblbauer; Najida Begum; George Dranitsaris; Danny Liew; Phil McEwan; Amir Abbas Tahami Monfared; Yong Yuan; Ariadna Juarez-Garcia; David Tyas; Michael Lees
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Evaluation of survival extrapolation in immuno-oncology using multiple pre-planned data cuts: learnings to aid in model selection.

Authors:  Ash Bullement; Anna Willis; Amerah Amin; Michael Schlichting; Anthony James Hatswell; Murtuza Bharmal
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.