Cost-effectiveness analysis of abemaciclib with endocrine therapy (ET) versus ET alone for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer in Italy.

IF 0.4 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment Pub Date : 2023-09-28 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.33393/grhta.2023.2561
Alison Davie, Sory Traoré, Massimo Giovannitti, Giuseppe Pompilio, Mark Lambton, Esra Cakar, Anuja Chatterjee
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness analysis of abemaciclib with endocrine therapy (ET) versus ET alone for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer in Italy.","authors":"Alison Davie,&nbsp;Sory Traoré,&nbsp;Massimo Giovannitti,&nbsp;Giuseppe Pompilio,&nbsp;Mark Lambton,&nbsp;Esra Cakar,&nbsp;Anuja Chatterjee","doi":"10.33393/grhta.2023.2561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Abemaciclib was recently approved by the European Medicines Agency in combination with adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for adult patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-), node-positive early breast cancer (EBC) at high risk of recurrence.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of abemaciclib plus ET vs. ET alone in patients with HR+, HER2-, node-positive EBC at high risk of disease recurrence, from the Italian healthcare system perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cohort state transition model was developed with five states: invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), nonmetastatic recurrence, remission, metastatic recurrence, and death. The analysis had a time horizon of 30 years. Individual patient-level data from the monarchE trial (NCT03155997) were used to generate IDFS estimates. Resource use included drug acquisition/administration, best supportive care, terminal care, adverse events, hospitalization, post-progression therapy, and associated resource use in the metastatic disease health state. Health state utilities were derived from monarchE patient-level data and other sources, applying Italian tariffs where feasible.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The estimated total discounted costs (€39,249 vs. €16,806; difference: €22,443) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (11.49 vs. 10.50; difference: 0.99) were higher for abemaciclib plus ET compared with ET alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €22,651 per QALY gained. The likelihood of abemaciclib plus ET being cost-effective vs. ET alone was 99% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY gained.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Abemaciclib plus ET is a cost-effective treatment option vs. ET alone for those with HR+, HER2- node-positive EBC at high risk of recurrence in Italy.</p>","PeriodicalId":12627,"journal":{"name":"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/22/ef/grhta-10-62.PMC10551672.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33393/grhta.2023.2561","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Abemaciclib was recently approved by the European Medicines Agency in combination with adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for adult patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-), node-positive early breast cancer (EBC) at high risk of recurrence.

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of abemaciclib plus ET vs. ET alone in patients with HR+, HER2-, node-positive EBC at high risk of disease recurrence, from the Italian healthcare system perspective.

Methods: A cohort state transition model was developed with five states: invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), nonmetastatic recurrence, remission, metastatic recurrence, and death. The analysis had a time horizon of 30 years. Individual patient-level data from the monarchE trial (NCT03155997) were used to generate IDFS estimates. Resource use included drug acquisition/administration, best supportive care, terminal care, adverse events, hospitalization, post-progression therapy, and associated resource use in the metastatic disease health state. Health state utilities were derived from monarchE patient-level data and other sources, applying Italian tariffs where feasible.

Results: The estimated total discounted costs (€39,249 vs. €16,806; difference: €22,443) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (11.49 vs. 10.50; difference: 0.99) were higher for abemaciclib plus ET compared with ET alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €22,651 per QALY gained. The likelihood of abemaciclib plus ET being cost-effective vs. ET alone was 99% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY gained.

Conclusion: Abemaciclib plus ET is a cost-effective treatment option vs. ET alone for those with HR+, HER2- node-positive EBC at high risk of recurrence in Italy.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

在意大利,阿贝马昔单抗联合内分泌治疗(ET)与单独使用ET治疗HR+、HER2-、节点阳性、高风险早期癌症的成本-效果分析。
背景:Abemaciclib最近被欧洲药品管理局批准与辅助内分泌疗法(ET)联合治疗复发风险高的成年激素受体阳性(HR+)、人表皮生长因子受体2阴性(HER2-)、结阳性早期癌症(EBC)患者。目的:从意大利医疗系统的角度评估阿匹昔单抗联合ET与单独使用ET治疗疾病复发风险高的HR+、HER2-、淋巴结阳性EBC患者的成本效益。方法:建立一个具有五种状态的队列状态转换模型:侵袭性无病生存期(IDFS)、非转移性复发、缓解、转移性复发和死亡。该分析的时间跨度为30年。来自君主E试验(NCT03155997)的个体患者水平数据用于生成IDFS估计值。资源使用包括药物获取/给药、最佳支持性护理、临终关怀、不良事件、住院治疗、进展后治疗以及转移性疾病健康状态下的相关资源使用。卫生国家公用事业来源于君主E患者水平数据和其他来源,在可行的情况下适用意大利关税。结果:与单独使用ET相比,阿贝单抗加ET的估计总贴现成本(39249欧元对16806欧元;差异:22443欧元)和质量调整寿命(QALYs)(11.49欧元对10.50;差异:0.99)更高。成本效益增量比率为每增加一个QALY 22651欧元。在每增加一次QALY支付30000欧元的意愿阈值下,阿匹昔单抗加ET与单独使用ET相比具有成本效益的可能性为99%。结论:对于那些在意大利复发风险较高的HR+、HER2-淋巴结阳性EBC患者,Abemaciclib联合ET与单独使用ET相比是一种具有成本效益的治疗方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment (GRHTA) is a peer-reviewed, open access journal which aims to promote health technology assessment and economic evaluation, enabling choices among alternative therapeutical paths or procedures with different clinical and economic outcomes. GRHTA is a unique journal having three different editorial boards who focus on their respective geographical expertise.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信