ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line cetuximab in relation to primary tumor location and after resection from the perspective of the Saudi healthcare system over a lifetime horizon. METHODS: Two standard partitioned survival models were developed in this study comprising 3 health states in each model. The first model was to simulate outcomes and costs of folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab compared with FOLFIRI alone in 2 target groups-first, in RAS wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and second, in patients administered with 4 cycles of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab, who underwent a resection of liver metastases. The second model compared FOLFIRI plus cetuximab with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in wild-type left-sided mCRC and after resection. All cost data and utilities were extracted from published data. RESULTS: FOLFIRI plus cetuximab in RAS wild-type left-sided mCRC compared with FOLFIRI alone resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of Saudi Riyal (SAR) 180 880 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained ($102 019; cost-effective). After resection of liver metastases, it resulted in SAR140 442 ($79 211) per QALY gained (cost-effective). When comparing FOLFIRI plus cetuximab with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, it resulted in SAR35 818 ($20 201) per QALY gained (highly cost-effective). After resection, it resulted in SAR109 612 ($61 822) per QALY gained (highly cost-effective). Thus, FOLFIRI plus cetuximab improved QALYs compared with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab at the minimized difference in costs in left-sided mCRC and patients with unresectable metastases. CONCLUSION: FOLFIRI plus cetuximab is cost-effective compared with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab or FOLFIRI alone in RAS wild-type left-sided mCRC and patients who undergo resection.
