Literature DB >> 34623638

Rising drug cost impacts on cost-effectiveness of 2 chemotherapy regimens for intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma: A report from the Children's Oncology Group.

Heidi V Russell1,2, Yueh-Yun Chi3, M Fatih Okcu1, M Brooke Bernhardt1, Carlos Rodriguez-Galindo4, Abha A Gupta5, Douglas S Hawkins6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Children's Oncology Group clinical trial for intermediate risk rhabdomyosarcoma randomized participants to a combination of vincristine, dactinomycin, and cyclophosphamide (VAC) alone or VAC alternating with vincristine plus irinotecan (VAC/VI). Clinical outcomes were similar, but toxicity profiles differed. This study estimates the cost differences between arms from the health care system's perspective.
METHODS: A decision-analytic model was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of VAC versus VAC/VI. Protocol-required or recommended medications and laboratory studies were included. Costs were obtained from national databases or supporting literature and inflated to 2019 US dollars. Demographic and outcome data were obtained from the clinical trial and directed chart reviews. Life-years (LY) were estimated from life-expectancy tables and discounted by 3% annually. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and alternative clinical scenarios identified factors driving costs.
RESULTS: Mean direct medical costs of VAC and VAC/VI were $164,757 and $102,303, respectively. VAC was associated with an additional 0.97 LY and an ICER of $64,386/LY compared with VAC/VI. The ICER was sensitive to survival estimations and to alternative clinical scenarios including outpatient cyclophosphamide delivery (ICER $49,037/LY) or substitution of alternative hematopoietic growth factor schedules (ICER $73,191-$91,579/LY). Applying drug prices from 2012 decreased the total costs of VAC by 20% and VAC/VI by 15% because of changes in dactinomycin and pegfilgrastim prices.
CONCLUSIONS: Neither arm was clearly more cost-effective. Pharmaceutical pricing and location of treatment drove costs and may inform future treatment decisions. Rising pharmaceutical costs added $30,000 per patient, a finding important for future drug-pricing policy decisions. LAY
SUMMARY: Two chemotherapy regimens recently tested side-by-side for rhabdomyosarcoma had similar tumor outcomes, but different side effects. The health care costs of each regimen were compared; neither was clearly more cost-effective. However, the costs of each treatment changed dramatically with choices of supportive medicines and location of treatment. Costs of treatment rose by 15% to 20% because of rising US drug costs not associated with the clinical trial.
© 2021 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cancer; chemotherapy; child; cost-effectiveness; rhabdomyosarcoma

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34623638      PMCID: PMC8738099          DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33917

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  42 in total

Review 1.  Assessment of Financial Burden as a Standard of Care in Pediatric Oncology.

Authors:  Wendy Pelletier; Kira Bona
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 3.167

2.  Performance goals for an adjunct diagnostic test to reduce unnecessary biopsies after screening mammography: analysis of costs, benefits, and consequences.

Authors:  Christoph I Lee; Mark E Bensink; Kristin Berry; Zahra Musa; Carolyn Bodnar; Robert Dann; Jeffrey G Jarvik; Constance D Lehman; Scott D Ramsey
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 5.532

3.  Inpatient versus outpatient vincristine, dactinomycin, and cyclophosphamide for pediatric cancers: Quality and cost implications.

Authors:  Rachel S Beaty; M Brooke Bernhardt; Amanda H Berger; Joy E Hesselgrave; Heidi V Russell; M Fatih Okcu
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 3.167

Review 4.  Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials II-An ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force report.

Authors:  Scott D Ramsey; Richard J Willke; Henry Glick; Shelby D Reed; Federico Augustovski; Bengt Jonsson; Andrew Briggs; Sean D Sullivan
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  Overspending driven by oversized single dose vials of cancer drugs.

Authors:  Peter B Bach; Rena M Conti; Raymond J Muller; Geoffrey C Schnorr; Leonard B Saltz
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-02-29

6.  Geography and the burden of care in pediatric cancers.

Authors:  Mark N Fluchel; Anne C Kirchhoff; Julia Bodson; Carol Sweeney; Sandra L Edwards; Qian Ding; Gregory J Stoddard; Anita Y Kinney
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2014-08-17       Impact factor: 3.167

Review 7.  Pharmacoeconomics of the myeloid growth factors: a critical and systematic review.

Authors:  Bradford R Hirsch; Gary H Lyman
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Variation in administration of cyclophosphamide and mesna in the treatment of childhood malignancies.

Authors:  T D Sievers; M A Lagan; S B Bartel; C Rasco; P J Blanding
Journal:  J Pediatr Oncol Nurs       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.636

9.  Validation of the German patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE™).

Authors:  V Hagelstein; I Ortland; A Wilmer; S A Mitchell; U Jaehde
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 32.976

Review 10.  Late mortality among 5-year survivors of childhood cancer: a summary from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.

Authors:  Gregory T Armstrong; Qi Liu; Yutaka Yasui; Joseph P Neglia; Wendy Leisenring; Leslie L Robison; Ann C Mertens
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-03-30       Impact factor: 44.544

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.