瑞非尼治疗三线转移性结直肠癌与西妥昔单抗联合伊立替康的成本-效果分析

Shuiqing Zhu, Jin Liu, Wentao Sun, L. Tao, D. Xiao, J. Xuan
{"title":"瑞非尼治疗三线转移性结直肠癌与西妥昔单抗联合伊立替康的成本-效果分析","authors":"Shuiqing Zhu, Jin Liu, Wentao Sun, L. Tao, D. Xiao, J. Xuan","doi":"10.21767/2471-9927.100038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: While the clinical effect of regorafenib for third-line metastatic colorectal cancer has been established, the economic effect of adopting the new therapy (regorafenib) is still unclear. The present study aimed to examine the costeffectiveness of regorafenib compared to cetuximab plus irinotecan in the Chinese setting. Methods: A Markov model was constructed to conduct the cost-effectiveness analysis from a third-party payer perspective. The cost of oncology drug, utilization of both in-hospital and outpatient care facilities, administration of medications via parenteral routes, use of supportive care medications, clinical monitoring with lab tests and diagnostic imaging, and care for treatment-emergent severe adverse events were considered. Clinical effectiveness data were obtained from the clinical trials. One-way sensitivity and probability sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of the base-case findings. Results: The model projected patients on regorafenib had an incremental gain of 0.03 QALYs relative to cetuximab plus irinotecan (0.68 Vs 0.65) at a cost-saving of ¥195,756 (¥221,860Vs¥417,616). For the subpopulation who received no previous targeted treatment, compared to cetuximab plus irinotecan, regorafenib was expected to result in additional gains of 0.15 QALYs at cost-saving of ¥95,987. Probability sensitivity analyses show that at the threshold of 3 times of GDP per capita of China (¥53,980*3), regorafenib has the probability of 82% to be costeffective against with cetuximab plus irinotecan. Conclusions: Regorafenib monotherapy is cost-saving and more effective compared with cetuximab plus irinotecan regimen in treatment patients with mCRC at third-line treatment setting in China.","PeriodicalId":79685,"journal":{"name":"Medical economics","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.21767/2471-9927.100038","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Regorafenib for Third-line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Compared to Cetuximab Plus Irinotecan in China\",\"authors\":\"Shuiqing Zhu, Jin Liu, Wentao Sun, L. Tao, D. Xiao, J. Xuan\",\"doi\":\"10.21767/2471-9927.100038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: While the clinical effect of regorafenib for third-line metastatic colorectal cancer has been established, the economic effect of adopting the new therapy (regorafenib) is still unclear. The present study aimed to examine the costeffectiveness of regorafenib compared to cetuximab plus irinotecan in the Chinese setting. Methods: A Markov model was constructed to conduct the cost-effectiveness analysis from a third-party payer perspective. The cost of oncology drug, utilization of both in-hospital and outpatient care facilities, administration of medications via parenteral routes, use of supportive care medications, clinical monitoring with lab tests and diagnostic imaging, and care for treatment-emergent severe adverse events were considered. Clinical effectiveness data were obtained from the clinical trials. One-way sensitivity and probability sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of the base-case findings. Results: The model projected patients on regorafenib had an incremental gain of 0.03 QALYs relative to cetuximab plus irinotecan (0.68 Vs 0.65) at a cost-saving of ¥195,756 (¥221,860Vs¥417,616). For the subpopulation who received no previous targeted treatment, compared to cetuximab plus irinotecan, regorafenib was expected to result in additional gains of 0.15 QALYs at cost-saving of ¥95,987. Probability sensitivity analyses show that at the threshold of 3 times of GDP per capita of China (¥53,980*3), regorafenib has the probability of 82% to be costeffective against with cetuximab plus irinotecan. Conclusions: Regorafenib monotherapy is cost-saving and more effective compared with cetuximab plus irinotecan regimen in treatment patients with mCRC at third-line treatment setting in China.\",\"PeriodicalId\":79685,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical economics\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.21767/2471-9927.100038\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21767/2471-9927.100038\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21767/2471-9927.100038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:虽然瑞非尼治疗三线转移性结直肠癌的临床疗效已经确立,但采用新疗法(瑞非尼)的经济效果尚不清楚。本研究旨在检验瑞非尼与西妥昔单抗加伊立替康在中国的成本效益。方法:构建马尔可夫模型,从第三方支付方角度进行成本-效果分析。考虑了肿瘤药物的成本、住院和门诊护理设施的使用、通过肠外途径给药、支持性护理药物的使用、通过实验室检查和诊断成像进行临床监测以及对治疗中出现的严重不良事件的护理。临床疗效数据来源于临床试验。进行了单向敏感性和概率敏感性分析,以检验基本情况研究结果的稳健性。结果:模型预测regorafenib患者相对于西妥昔单抗+伊立替康(0.68 Vs 0.65)有0.03 QALYs的增量增益,节省成本为195,756日元(221,860日元Vs 417,616日元)。对于先前未接受过靶向治疗的亚群,与西妥昔单抗+伊立替康相比,regorafenib预计将带来0.15 QALYs的额外收益,节省成本95,987日元。概率敏感性分析表明,在中国人均GDP的3倍(¥53,980*3)阈值下,瑞非尼与西妥昔单抗联合伊立替康的成本效益概率为82%。结论:与西妥昔单抗+伊立替康方案相比,瑞戈非尼单药治疗在中国三线治疗mCRC患者中更节省成本且更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Regorafenib for Third-line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Compared to Cetuximab Plus Irinotecan in China
Objective: While the clinical effect of regorafenib for third-line metastatic colorectal cancer has been established, the economic effect of adopting the new therapy (regorafenib) is still unclear. The present study aimed to examine the costeffectiveness of regorafenib compared to cetuximab plus irinotecan in the Chinese setting. Methods: A Markov model was constructed to conduct the cost-effectiveness analysis from a third-party payer perspective. The cost of oncology drug, utilization of both in-hospital and outpatient care facilities, administration of medications via parenteral routes, use of supportive care medications, clinical monitoring with lab tests and diagnostic imaging, and care for treatment-emergent severe adverse events were considered. Clinical effectiveness data were obtained from the clinical trials. One-way sensitivity and probability sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of the base-case findings. Results: The model projected patients on regorafenib had an incremental gain of 0.03 QALYs relative to cetuximab plus irinotecan (0.68 Vs 0.65) at a cost-saving of ¥195,756 (¥221,860Vs¥417,616). For the subpopulation who received no previous targeted treatment, compared to cetuximab plus irinotecan, regorafenib was expected to result in additional gains of 0.15 QALYs at cost-saving of ¥95,987. Probability sensitivity analyses show that at the threshold of 3 times of GDP per capita of China (¥53,980*3), regorafenib has the probability of 82% to be costeffective against with cetuximab plus irinotecan. Conclusions: Regorafenib monotherapy is cost-saving and more effective compared with cetuximab plus irinotecan regimen in treatment patients with mCRC at third-line treatment setting in China.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信