Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Publication year range
1.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0302548, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38728337

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance therapy plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone for adults with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) that had not progressed following platinum-based chemotherapy in France. METHODS: A three-state partitioned survival model was developed to assess the lifetime costs and effects of avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone. Data from the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial (NCT02603432) were used to inform estimates of clinical and utility values considering a 10-year time horizon and a weekly cycle length. Cost data were estimated from a collective perspective and included treatment acquisition, administration, follow-up, adverse event-related hospitalization, transport, post-progression, and end-of-life costs. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and life-years gained. Costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 2.5% per annum. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to compare cost-effectiveness and willingness to pay in France. Uncertainty was assessed using a range of sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Avelumab plus BSC was associated with a gain of 2.49 QALYs and total discounted costs of €136,917; BSC alone was associated with 1.82 QALYs and €39,751. Although avelumab plus BSC was associated with increased acquisition costs compared with BSC alone, offsets of -€20,424 and -€351 were observed for post-progression and end-of-life costs, respectively. The base case analysis ICER was €145,626/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were consistent with the reference case and showed that efficacy parameters (overall survival, time to treatment discontinuation), post-progression time on immunotherapy, and post-progression costs had the largest impact on the ICER. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrated that avelumab plus BSC is associated with a favorable cost-effectiveness profile for patients with la/mUC who are eligible for 1L maintenance therapy in France.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/economics , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , France , Male , Female , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/economics , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Aged , Middle Aged , Adult , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/economics , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/mortality , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathology , Neoplasm Metastasis , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urologic Neoplasms/mortality , Urologic Neoplasms/economics , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , Maintenance Chemotherapy/economics
2.
Bull Cancer ; 109(9): 925-937, 2022 Sep.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35725592

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Bladder cancer is currently ranked as the 8th most common cancer in France. However, the patient care pathway for this cancer is still not well known. METHODS: A telephone survey was conducted with fifteen healthcare professionals, ten patients, and five family caregivers between November 2020 and March 2021. The objectives of this survey were to identify the major steps in the care pathway according to the medical, emotional and societal dimensions, for patients with locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer, the associated barriers, and the initiatives to be implemented to improve it. RESULTS: Several barriers were identified at different stages of the overall care pathway, including lack of knowledge of risk factors and warning signs of the disease by the general population and some healthcare professionals, difficulties linked to the announcement consultation, lack of psychological support for patients and their caregivers, and lack of information given about the disease and supportive care. DISCUSSION: These results allowed us to identify three major initiatives which could improve the overall care pathway and the quality of life of patients and their caregivers: 1/implementation of a public awareness campaign on bladder cancer; 2/creation of booklets for patients and their caregivers to provide them with a source of reliable information; and 3/the creation of communication tools between healthcare professionals and patients to facilitate exchanges during consultations.


Subject(s)
Quality of Life , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Caregivers , France , Health Personnel , Humans , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...