Cost-Utility Analysis of Maintenance Pemetrexed Plus Best Supportive Care Compared With Best Supportive Care Alone in Treating Patients With Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer in Jordan

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the cost-effectiveness of maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care (BSC) in non–small cell lung cancer patients from a Jordanian healthcare system perspective.

Methods

A Markov model with 4 health states was developed to estimate life years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), costs, and the incremental cost-utility ratio of pemetrexed plus BSC versus BSC. A lifelong time horizon was used in the base-case analysis. The transition probabilities were estimated from the PARAMOUNT trial, the utility weights were taken from published literature, and costs were based on data and unit costs at King Hussein Cancer Center and the Jordan Food and Drug Administration. Both costs and outcomes were discounted using a 3%. The parameter uncertainty was tested using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

The base-case analysis showed that pemetrexed plus BSC increased QALYs and cost compared with BSC. Pemetrexed plus BSC leads to incremental 0.255 QALYs and incremental costs of US $30 826, resulting in an incremental cost-utility ratio of US $120 886/QALY.

The results were sensitive to changes in the utility estimates during the progression-free health state, the progression health state, and the cost of postprogression medications The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of pemetrexed plus BSC being a cost-effective option compared with BSC is 0 at a threshold of $56 000.

Conclusions

Maintenance pemetrexed for non–small cell lung cancer is not a cost-effective option compared with BSC from a healthcare system perspective based on the listed price at a threshold of $56 000/QALY.