Cost-effectiveness analysis of paclitaxel

被引:3
|
作者
Eandi, Mario [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Torino, Ordinario Farmacol Clin, Turin, Italy
关键词
non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); paclitaxel/carboplatin; gemcitabine/cisplatin; vinorelbine/cisplatin; cost-effectiveness analysis;
D O I
10.7175/fe.v7i2.680
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common type of lung cancer and its medical and economical burden represents a serious matter in Europe and Usa, due to its high mortality rates and drug costs. Lung cancer is responsible for about 30% of cancer death in men and women; in Europe only about 8 per cent of people with lung cancer survive for 5 years. At present combination chemotherapy based on cisplatin or carboplatin associated with paclitaxel, vinorelbine or gemcitabine is the state of the art for the treatment in patients with stage IIIb or IV NSCLC. Aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel/carboplatin (PCb), gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) and vinorelbine/cisplatin (VC) in the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. Therefore we perfomed a semi-Markov decision model mainly based on clinical results from the Italian Lung Cancer Project. The model included differential direct medical costs registered for two years from starting chemotherapy, using tariffs valid for 2005. Benefits was measured by years of life saved (YOLs). The model also allowed to estimate only costs accrued over the period of time, performing a cost-minimisation analysis. According to cost-effectiveness analysis, VC is dominated because it's more costly and less effective than GC. On the contrary, combination chemotherapy with GC is more inexpensive but less effective than paclitaxel/ carboplatin (PCb): in this case we compared the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with a maximum acceptable willingness-to-pay (WTP) value. In the base scenario the ICER of PCb over GC treatment is 52,326 euro/YOLs, which is definitely lower than the maximum acceptable WTP value. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results from cost-effectiveness analysis in the base scenario.
引用
收藏
页码:97 / 117
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Cost-effectiveness analysis in pathology
    Raab, SS
    CLINICS IN LABORATORY MEDICINE, 1999, 19 (04) : 757 - +
  • [32] Cost-effectiveness analysis in radiology
    vanKaick, G
    Reiser, M
    RADIOLOGE, 1996, 36 (04): : 269 - 269
  • [33] Medicare and cost-effectiveness analysis
    Smolkin, MT
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2006, 354 (02): : 207 - 208
  • [34] COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF TRANSPLANTATION
    EVANS, RW
    SURGICAL CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1986, 66 (03) : 603 - 615
  • [35] Cost-effectiveness analysis for clinicians
    Hill, Suzanne R.
    BMC MEDICINE, 2012, 10
  • [36] The Limits of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
    Weintraub, William S.
    Cohen, David J.
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR QUALITY AND OUTCOMES, 2009, 2 (01): : 55 - 58
  • [37] COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS - IS IT ETHICAL
    WILLIAMS, A
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 1992, 18 (01) : 7 - 11
  • [38] Cost-effectiveness analysis in surgery
    Finlayson, SRG
    Birkmeyer, JD
    SURGERY, 1998, 123 (02) : 151 - 156
  • [39] COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS FOR SURGEONS
    Koerkamp, Bas Groot
    Wang, Y. Claire
    Hunink, Myriam G. M.
    SURGERY, 2009, 145 (06) : 616 - 622
  • [40] Cost-Effectiveness Analysis 2.0
    Neumann, Peter J.
    Sanders, Gillian D.
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2017, 376 (03): : 203 - 205