Literature DB >> 7666075

Economic evaluation of a randomized clinical trial comparing vinorelbine, vinorelbine plus cisplatin, and vindesine plus cisplatin for non-small-cell lung cancer.

T J Smith1, B E Hillner, D M Neighbors, P A McSorley, T Le Chevalier.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To estimate the comparative cost-effectiveness of three regimens for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
METHODS: Results from a randomized clinical trial of 612 European patients with NSCLC, and cost data from an academic cancer center, the Medical College of Virginia, were analyzed. In this post-hoc economic analysis, we compared vinorelbine alone, vinorelbine plus cisplatin, and a common regimen of vindesine plus cisplatin.
RESULTS: Vinorelbine plus cisplatin resulted in the longest mean survival time of the three regimens, 49.6 weeks, followed by vindesine plus cisplatin, 44.3 weeks, and vinorelbine, 41.6 weeks. Compared with vinorelbine alone, vinorelbine plus cisplatin added 56 days at a cost of $2,700, resulting in a cost-effectiveness ratio of $17,700 per year of life gained. Similarly, vindesine plus cisplatin added 19 days at a cost of $1,150, or $22,100 per year of life gained. Compared with vindesine plus cisplatin, vinorelbine plus cisplatin added 37 days at a cost of $1,570, or $15,500 per year of life gained.
CONCLUSION: The most effective regimen of vinorelbine plus cisplatin added substantial benefit compared with vinorelbine alone or another common treatment, vindesine plus cisplatin, at a cost-effectiveness within accepted limits for medical interventions. Vindesine plus cisplatin also added benefit at an acceptable cost per year of life gained. If vinorelbine is preferred because of its toxicity profile, the additional effectiveness of cisplatin added substantial benefit at an acceptable cost. Compared with other common medical interventions, chemotherapy for NSCLC has acceptable efficacy and cost-effectiveness and should not be arbitrarily denied based on clinical or economic grounds.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7666075     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1995.13.9.2166

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  9 in total

1.  Economic analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Authors:  G H Lyman
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 2.  The effect of pharmacoeconomics on company research and development decisions.

Authors:  H Grabowski
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Clinical and cost effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  A Clegg; D A Scott; P Hewitson; M Sidhu; N Waugh
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 9.139

4.  Vinorelbine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. A pharmacoeconomic review.

Authors:  A J Coukell; S Noble; D Faulds
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Comparative cost-minimisation of oral and intravenous chemotherapy for first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer in the UK NHS system.

Authors:  K Le Lay; E Myon; S Hill; L Riou-Franca; D Scott; M Sidhu; D Dunlop; R Launois
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2007-02-28

Review 6.  Docetaxel in non-small cell lung cancer: impact on quality of life and pharmacoeconomics.

Authors:  Leora Horn; Antonio Visbal; Natasha B Leighl
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.923

Review 7.  Economics of treatments for non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Christos Chouaid; Kukovi Atsou; Gilles Hejblum; Alain Vergnenegre
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 8.  Vinorelbine--a clinical review.

Authors:  R K Gregory; I E Smith
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 9.  The case for the introduction of new chemotherapy agents in the treatment of advanced non small cell lung cancer in the wake of the findings of The National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE).

Authors:  J S Waters; M E R O'Brien
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2002-08-27       Impact factor: 7.640

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.