Cost-effectiveness of first-line treatment options for patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Several strategies are available for the initial treatment of advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma, but the optimal strategy in terms of cost-effectiveness is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the quality-adjusted effectiveness and costs of five modern treatment options for transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma. METHODS: A Markov decision-analytic model was developed using a 20-year time horizon. Five of the most common treatment approaches were selected based on clinical experience and expert opinion: (1) six cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD), including data from the HD2000 trial, Viviani and colleagues, and EORTC trial; (2) six cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP; from the HD15 trial or PET-adapted as in the HD18 trial, two initial cycles of BEACOPP followed by four additional cycles for patients with a positive PET and either two or four additional cycles of BEACOPP for patients with a negative PET); (3) PET-adapted escalation (as in the RATHL trial, two cycles of standard ABVD chemotherapy followed by an additional four cycles of ABVD or AVD in PET-negative patients and four cycles of BEACOPP in PET-positive patients); (4) six cycles of brentuximab vedotin, doxorubicin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (A-AVD) or ABVD as in the Echelon-1 trial; and (5) PET-adapted de-escalation (as in the AHL2011 trial, two cycles of BEACOPP followed by PET2 scan; PET-positive patients received two additional BEACOPP cycles and PET-negative patients received two cycles of ABVD; at PET4, PET-negative patients completed two further cycles of either ABVD or BEACOPP depending on what they received after PET2, and PET-positive patients received salvage therapy). Note that all uses of BEACOPP in these strategies were BEACOPPescalated. The randomised groups of interest from these studies comprised 4255 patients enrolled between April, 2000, and January, 2016. Baseline probability estimates and utilities were derived from the included trials in addition to a systematic review of published studies. A Canadian public health payer's perspective was considered (CAN$1=US$0·74) and adjusted for inflation for 2018. All costs and benefits were discounted by 1·5% per year because life-years now are more valuable than future potential life-years. FINDINGS: Probabilistic analyses (10 000 simulations) showed that, for a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAN$50 000, a PET-adapted de-escalation strategy based on AHL2011 was more cost-effective 87% of the time. This strategy had the highest number of life-years (14·6 years [95% CI 13·7-15·1]) and quality-adjusted life years (13·2 years [95% CI 10·2-14·4]), and the lowest direct costs ($53 129 [95% CI 31 914-94 446]) compared with the other treatment regimens. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model was robust to key variables, including probability of treatment-related mortality, relapse, frequency of secondary malignancy, death from secondary malignancy, and probability of infertility after BEACOPP. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that, when considering cost, effectiveness, and short and long-term toxicities, the preferred treatment strategy for patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma is the PET-adapted de-escalation regimen starting with BEACOPP and de-escalating to ABVD as appropriate. Although our findings do not provide an absolute best treatment approach for clinicians to follow for all patients, they can contribute to shared decision making between patients and treating physicians. FUNDING: None.

An evaluation of brentuximab vedotin as a treatment option for stage III/IV Hodgkin lymphoma.

Introduction: Outcomes of patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma are excellent, and the intent of frontline therapy for even advanced-stage disease has been curative. This review summarizes the role of brentuximab vedotin in the upfront treatment of advanced stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma in the context of reducing therapy-related toxicity without compromising the high cure rate. Areas covered: Strategies to reduce bleomycin-induced lung toxicity include a response-adapted approach investigated in the RATHL study and a replacement of bleomycin with brentuximab vedotin in frontline chemotherapy regimens. In both studies, omission of bleomycin in the non-standard arms decreased the rate of pulmonary toxicity while maintaining high progression-free survival and overall survival rates. Expert opinion: The approval of A+AVD in North America offers a new bleomycin-free regimen for the treatment of advanced-stage HL, but it must be balanced against a risk-adapted approach. Recently presented subset analyses raise a question about which patients benefit most from this therapy.

Time-Series Modeling and Simulation for Comparative Cost-Effective Analysis in Cancer Chemotherapy: An Application to Platinum-Based Regimens for Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

The purpose of this study was to propose a time-series modeling and simulation (M&S) strategy for probabilistic cost-effective analysis in cancer chemotherapy using a Monte-Carlo method based on data available from the literature. The simulation included the cost for chemotherapy, for pharmaceutical care for adverse events (AEs) and other medical costs. As an application example, we describe the analysis for the comparison of four regimens, cisplatin plus irinotecan, carboplatin plus paclitaxel, cisplatin plus gemcitabine (GP), and cisplatin plus vinorelbine, for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. The factors, drug efficacy explained by overall survival or time to treatment failure, frequency and severity of AEs, utility value of AEs to determine QOL, the drugs' and other medical costs in Japan, were included in the model. The simulation was performed and quality adjusted life years (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. An index, percentage of superiority (%SUP) which is the rate of the increased cost vs. QALY-gained plots within the area of positive QALY-gained and also below some threshold values of the ICER, was calculated as functions of threshold values of the ICER. An M&S process was developed, and for the simulation example, the GP regimen was the most cost-effective, in case of threshold values of the ICER=$70000/year, the %SUP for the GP are more than 50%. We developed an M&S process for probabilistic cost-effective analysis, this method would be useful for decision-making in choosing a cancer chemotherapy regimen in terms of pharmacoeconomic.

Oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus pemetrexed plus cisplatin as first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: cost minimization analysis in 12 European countries.

OBJECTIVE: A combination of vinorelbine and cisplatin is a standard treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer; oral vinorelbine is registered in 45 countries. Pemetrexed and cisplatin are recommended in front-line chemotherapy of non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC). The objective of this study was to conduct a cost minimization analysis from the perspective of the national health service (NHS) in each of 12 European countries, based on a randomized phase II study in NS-NSCLC (NAVoTRIAL01), with 100 oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin patients (arm A) and 51 pemetrexed plus cisplatin patients (arm B). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Country-specific costs and DRG codes considered included those relating to anticancer drugs, administration settings (out-patient/in-patient/at home), serious adverse events (defined as involving hospitalization and considered due to anticancer drugs) and concomitant medications. Relevant costs were calculated based on country-specific reimbursement procedures and official tariffs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost and savings per patient. RESULTS: Using the NHS perspective, savings per patient treated with oral vinorelbine ranged from €1317 (Denmark) to €35,001 (Germany). Expressed as percentages, savings per patient treated with oral vinorelbine compared with pemetrexed ranged between 5% (France) and 83% (Czech Republic). Pooled average costs for each treatment arm across the 12 countries resulted in cost savings for payers of €12,871, favoring oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin. CONCLUSIONS: Given the reported efficacy with both regimens, this pan-European economic analysis provides compelling evidence supporting oral vinorelbine use over pemetrexed for the treatment of NS-NSCLC. Oral vinorelbine provides similar efficacy and an easily manageable safety profile at lower overall cost per patient treated, combined with an easier/more convenient mode of administration. Sensitivity analysis across varied scenarios demonstrated the robustness of the results. The principle weakness of our study was its reliance upon a single small scale study to provide efficacy data, since this is the only study conducted in this specific population of patients. Further large scale trials are needed to confirm these results.

Effectiveness, toxicity, and economic evaluation of vinflunine for the treatment of patients with transitional cell carcinoma in the Spanish outpatient setting.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and toxicity profile of the vinflunine chemotherapy regimen and to examine the cost-effectiveness relation in a real-world sample of patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. This is a multicenter, observational, retrospective cohort study. To assess the effectiveness and safety of vinflunine treatment, progression-free survival, overall survival, and adverse events were registered. An economic evaluation was performed and cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. A total of 37 patients were included in the study, with a mean age of 67 (SD=9) years. The median progression-free survival was 2.61 months (95% confidence interval 1.79-4.23) and the median overall survival was 5.72 months (95% confidence interval 3.34-10.35). An objective response was achieved in eight (22%) patients. Statistically significant differences were found between patients treated with vinflunine as a second-line therapy and those treated with vinflunine as a third-line therapy (P=0.036). The most commonly reported analytical adverse event was anemia (n=34; 92%), and the most severe was neutropenia (n=19; 51%), with nine patients developing grade 4 neutropenia (9/19; 47%). The total cost of vinflunine treatment was &OV0556;553 873, with a median of &OV0556;8524 (interquartile range, &OV0556;9220) per patient. The median-based cost-effectiveness ratio was &OV0556;44 789 (&OV0556;31 706-58 022) per progression-free year gained and &OV0556;22 750 (&OV0556;14 526-34 085) per life-year gained. The data from this study fill an important need for information on the relative value of this treatment in terms of cost-effectiveness and might help achieve an optimal quality healthcare system.

A review of systematic reviews of the cost-effectiveness of hormone therapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy for breast cancer.

Breast cancer is a global health concern. In fact, breast cancer is the primary cause of death among women worldwide and constitutes the most expensive malignancy to treat. As health care resources are finite, decisions regarding the adoption and coverage of breast cancer treatments are increasingly being based on "value for money," i.e., cost-effectiveness. As the evidence about the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer treatments is abundant, therefore difficult to navigate, systematic reviews of published systematic reviews offer the advantage of bringing together the results of separate systematic reviews in a single report. As a consequence, this paper presents an overview of systematic reviews of the cost-effectiveness of hormone therapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy for breast cancer to inform policy and reimbursement decision-making. A systematic review was conducted of published systematic reviews documenting cost-effectiveness analyses of breast cancer treatments from 2000 to 2014. Systematic reviews identified through a literature search of health and economic databases were independently assessed against inclusion and exclusion criteria. Systematic reviews of original evaluations were included only if they targeted breast cancer patients and specific breast cancer treatments (hormone therapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy only), documented incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and were reported in the English language. The search strategy used a combination of these key words: "breast cancer," "systematic review/meta-analysis," and "cost-effectiveness/economics." Data were extracted using predefined extraction forms and qualitatively appraised using the assessment of multiple systematic reviews (AMSTAR) tool. The literature search resulted in 511 bibliographic records, of which ten met our inclusion criteria. Five reviews were conducted in the early-stage breast cancer setting and five reviews in the metastatic setting. In early-stage breast cancer, evidence about trastuzumab value differed by age. Trastuzumab was cost-effective only in women with HER2-positive breast cancer younger than 65 years and over a life-time horizon. The cost-effectiveness of trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer yielded conflicting results. The same conclusions were reached in comparisons between vinorelbine and taxanes. In both early stage and advanced/metastatic breast cancer, newer aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have proved cost-effective compared to older treatments. This overview of systematic reviews shows that there is heterogeneity in the evidence concerning the cost-effectiveness of hormone therapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy for breast cancer. The cost-effectiveness of these treatments depends not only on the comparators but the context, i.e., adjuvant or metastatic setting, subtype of patient population, and perspective adopted. Decisions involving the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer treatments could be made easier and more transparent by better harmonizing the reporting of economic evaluations assessing the value of these treatments.

ErbB2+ metastatic breast cancer treatment after progression on trastuzumab: a cost-effectiveness analysis for a developing country.

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer (BC) and metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are significant causes of deaths amongst women worldwide, including developing countries. The cost of treatment in the latter is even more of an issue than in higher income countries. ErbB2 overexpression is a marker of poor prognosis and the goal for targeted therapy. This study was aimed at evaluating the cost-effectiveness in Colombia of ErbB2+ MBC treatment after progression on trastuzumab. METHODS: A decision analytic model was constructed for evaluating such treatment in a hypothetical cohort of ErbB2+MBC patients who progressed after a first scheme involving trastuzumab. The alternatives compared were lapatinib+capecitabine (L+C), and trastuzumab+a chemotherapy agent (capecitabine, vinorelbine or a taxane). Markov models were used for calculating progression-free time and the associated costs. Effectiveness estimators for such therapy were identified from primary studies; all direct medical costs based on national fees-guidelines were included. Sensitivity was analyzed and acceptability curves estimated. A 3 % discount rate and third-payer perspective were used within a 5-year horizon. RESULTS: L+C dominated its comparators. Its cost-effectiveness ratio was COP $49,725,045 per progression-free year. The factors most influencing the results were the alternatives' hazard ratios and the cost of trastuzumab. CONCLUSION: Lapatinib was cost-effective compared to its alternatives for treating MBC after progression on trastuzumab using a Colombian decision analytic model.

Oral vinorelbine in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Originally formulated as an intravenous (i.v.) agent, vinorelbine is also currently available as an oral chemotherapeutic agent. Oral vinorelbine has demonstrated significant activity in different settings for NSCLC, including adjuvant treatment for resected disease, concurrent chemoradiation for locally advanced NSCLC and palliative chemotherapy for recurrent/metastatic NSCLC, as part of combination schedules or as a single-agent treatment. AREAS COVERED: The authors explored the available data describing the use of oral vinorelbine in NSCLC. PubMed articles and abstracts presented at international conferences were analysed, and relevant trials were reported and discussed. Specific settings, including the treatment of elderly and unfit patients and metronomic schedules including oral vinorelbine, were evaluated. Available pharmacoeconomic data were also assessed. EXPERT OPINION: Oral vinorelbine is an appealing agent, particularly as part of combination regimens containing platinum derivatives, although it can have a role as a single-agent treatment as well. Its safety profile is generally favourable and its route of administration is generally preferred by patients receiving chemotherapy. Compared to i.v. vinorelbine and other antineoplastic agents, oral vinorelbine has been reported to be advantageous in terms of cost savings.

ErbB2+ metastatic breast cancer treatment after progression on trastuzumab: a cost-effectiveness analysis for a developing country / Tratamientos para cáncer de seno metastásico ErbB2+ en progresión Post-Trastuzumab: Análisis de costo-efectividad para un país en vía de desarrollo

Objective Breast cancer (BC) and metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are significant causes of deaths amongst women worldwide, including developing countries. The cost of treatment in the latter is even more of an issue than in higher income countries. ErbB2 overexpression is a marker of poor prognosis and the goal for targeted therapy. This study was aimed at evaluating the cost-effectiveness in Colombia of ErbB2+ MBC treatment after progression on trastuzumab. Methods A decision analytic model was constructed for evaluating such treatment in a hypothetical cohort of ErbB2+MBC patients who progressed after a first scheme involving trastuzumab. The alternatives compared were lapatinib+capecitabine (L+C), and trastuzumab+a chemotherapy agent (capecitabine, vinorelbine or a taxane). Markov models were used for calculating progression-free time and the associated costs. Effectiveness estimators for such therapy were identified from primary studies; all direct medical costs based on national fees-guidelines were included. Sensitivity was analyzed and acceptability curves estimated. A 3 % discount rate and third-payer perspective were used within a 5-year horizon. Results L+C dominated its comparators. Its cost-effectiveness ratio was COP $49,725,045 per progression-free year. The factors most influencing the results were the alternatives' hazard ratios and the cost of trastuzumab. Conclusion Lapatinib was cost-effective compared to its alternatives for treating MBC after progression on trastuzumab using a Colombian decision analytic model.

Objetivo El cáncer de seno (CS) y cáncer de seno metastásico (CSM) son importantes causas de muerte entre las mujeres a nivel mundial y en países en vía de desarrollo. En estos últimos los costos de los tratamientos son aún más preocupantes que en países de alto ingreso. La sobreexpresión de ErbB2 es marcador de pobre pronóstico y objetivo de terapias dirigidas. Se evaluó la costo-efectividad de los tratamientos de CSM ErbB2+ en progresión post-trastuzumab en Colombia. Métodos Se desarrolló un modelo analístico de decisiones para evaluar los tratamientos en una cohorte hipotética de CSM ErbB2+ que progresaron después de un primer esquema con trastuzumab. Las alternativas comparadas fueron: lapatinib+capecitabina (L+C), y trastuzumab más un agente quimioterápico (capecitabina, vinorelbinao un taxano). Se usaron modelos de Markov para calcular el tiempo libre de progresión y los costos asociados. Estimaciones de efectividad fueron identificadas de estudios primarios. Se incluyeron todos los costos médicos directos basados en los manuales tarifarios nacionales. Se realizaron análisis de sensibilidad y curvas de aceptabilidad. Se descontaron costos y resultados a una tasa anual de 3 %, la perspectiva de análisis fue del tercer pagador y el horizonte de 5 años. Resultados L+C domina a sus comparadores con un razón de costo-efectividad de COP $49 725 045 por año libre de progresión. Los factores que más influencian los resultados son los hazard ratios de las alternativas y el costo de trastuzumab. Conclusión Lapatinib es costo-efectivo comparado con sus alternativas para el tratamiento del CSM después de la progresión con trastuzumab en el escenario colombiano.

[Chemotherapy in male external genital organs (testicular and penile cancer)]. / Chimiothérapie des organes génitaux externes chez l'homme (cancer du testicule et du pénis).

AIM: To describe drugs used in the chemotherapy of testis and penis neoplasms. MATERIAL: Bibliographical search was performed from the database Medline (National Library of Medicine, PubMed) and websites of the HAS and the ANSM. The search was focused on the characteristics, the mode of action, the efficiency and the side effects of the various drugs concerned. RESULTS: Nowadays, the chemotherapy is perfectly codified in adjuvant treatment or in first-line treatment of metastatic testis cancer. A single dose of carboplatin for seminoma testicular (stage I) in adjuvant treatment situation is one of the latest advances. Concerning penis cancer, the optimal protocols validated by a high level of evidence are missing. CONCLUSION: The chemotherapy in testis and penis neoplasms knew few advances in recent years. So, it is necessary to include patients in clinical research protocols.

Cost-effectiveness of pemetrexed plus cisplatin: malignant pleural mesothelioma treatment in UK clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: Findings from the largest randomized phase III trial in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (EMPHACIS study; n = 448) were used to examine the cost-effectiveness of pemetrexed plus cisplatin therapy versus cisplatin monotherapy in patients with the disease. The cost-effectiveness of pemetrexed/cisplatin versus alternative treatments was also examined. METHODS: Two cost-effectiveness analyses were designed to model best survival outcome over time for a number of patient cohorts. First, trial-based patient-level data were utilized and resource use was costed for the study arm and comparator. A second cost-effectiveness analysis then compared the mean costs and outcomes associated with pemetrexed/cisplatin with the most commonly used (unlicensed) regimens in the United Kingdom-mitomycin-C, vinblastine, and cisplatin (MVP); vinorelbine; and active symptom control-using trial-based data and data extrapolated from a review of the literature. RESULTS: The total pemetrexed/cisplatin cost per patient varied between pound8779 and pound9020 for all cohorts studied in model 1. Average life-years gained per patient were between 0.20 and 0.28. Quality-adjusted life-years, based on mean and median survival, ranged from 0.13 to 0.31. Incremental cost per life-year gained and quality-adjusted life-year ratios, using both mean and median survival, ranged from pound20,475 to pound68,598. The second cost-effectiveness analysis resulted in ratios ranging from pound14,595 to pound32,066. CONCLUSIONS: Pemetrexed/cisplatin demonstrated acceptable cost-effectiveness when compared with cisplatin monotherapy and alternative treatments commonly used in UK clinical practice.

[Analysis of antineoplastic drugs used in Cancer Center, Sun Yat-sen University, during the period of 1996-2005].

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Lately, the prevention, treatment and research of cancer have developed rapidly. Antineoplastic drugs have become one of the major measures for cancer therapy. Many new antineoplastic drugs have been discovered and prepared, and used to treat tumors. Cancer Center of Sun Yat-sen University is one of the biggest cancer hospitals in South China. The use of antineoplastic drugs of this center can reflect changes in this area. This study was to analyze and evaluate the situation and trend of antineoplastic drugs used in Cancer Center, Sun Yat-sen University from 1996 and 2005, in order to provide references for the rational use of drugs in clinical application. METHODS: Consumption of antineoplastic drugs was analyzed by sum and defined daily dose (DDDs) ranking. RESULTS: The costs of antineoplastic drugs occupied 31.0%-48.8% of all drugs from 1996 to 2005; and the average increasing ratio is 21.5%. The cost rate of anti-cancer vegetable drugs and other genus increased the quickest, while the total costs of alkylate increased the slowest during the ten years. Some new monoantibodies and gene drugs were continuously applied in clinical use. CONCLUSION: The direction of the research and development of antineoplastic drugs is towards high efficiency, low toxicity and individualized use.

The impact of practice guidelines and funding policies on the use of new drugs in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cancer Care Ontario's (CCO) Program in Evidence-based Care has provided a credible basis for policy development and the funding of new and expensive anticancer drugs in the province of Ontario. In November 1997, vinorelbine was approved for the first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) on the basis of evidence-based practice guidelines generated by the Provincial Lung Disease Site Group. In June 1998, gemcitabine was approved as an alternative to vinorelbine for use in selected patients (e.g. significant venous access problems, peripheral neuropathy, severe toxicity to vinorelbine). A provincial drug database was used to determine the impact that these new policies had on the rate of vinorelbine and gemcitabine uptake within the CCO new drug funding programme. METHODS: Drug utilization data for vinorelbine and gemcitabine from October 1997 to June 1999 were obtained from the CCO drug database. Individual patient data consisted of age, gender, first-line agent used, number of treatments, duration of therapy, treatment location (regional cancer centre vs. other) and total cost. Demographic and drug utilization data were analysed descriptively as means, medians, or proportions. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was then used to identify factors associated with the selection of gemcitabine over vinorelbine, as a first-line therapy. RESULTS: Following the approval of the first policy in November 1997, there was a rapid adoption of vinorelbine use in new NSCLC patients. When the gemcitabine policy was approved in June 1998, there was a rapid uptake in its use reaching a stable plateau of approximately 15% of all NSCLC patients within 9 months. The logistic regression analysis identified patient age greater than 65 years [odds ratio (OR) = 1.90, P = 0.001] and treatment in a non-regional cancer setting (OR = 1.71, P = 0.008) as significant predictors of gemcitabine utilization. Overall, the mean drug cost per patient treated with first-line gemcitabine was significantly higher than vinorelbine (Can 2590 dollars vs. Can 1030 dollars, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The new funding policies were associated with a rapid increase in drug utilization reaching a stable plateau within 9 months. Factors contributing to the usage of these new drugs for NSCLC included patient characteristics, such as age and treatment location.

Multicentre randomised phase III study comparing the same dose and schedule of cisplatin plus the same schedule of vinorelbine or gemcitabine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

This study compares two cytotoxic regimens comprising the same dose and schedule of cisplatin (CP) plus vinorelbine (VNR) or gemcitabine (GEM) administered under the same schedule to patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). From April 1998 to February 2003, 285 patients were randomised to receive either VNR 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 as an intravenous (i.v.) bolus plus CP 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 (regimen A) or GEM 1200 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 as an i.v. 30-min infusion plus CP 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 (regimen B). Both treatments were recycled every 21 days. If no progression had occurred after six cycles, the patients continued to receive VNR or GEM monochemotherapy weekly. Cross-over of the two single agents was considered if disease progression occurred. Objective response (OR), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. 272 patients were ultimately eligible (137 on A and 135 on B). Their main characteristics were: male/female ratio 214/58; median age 63 (range 32-77) years; median Karnofsky Performance Status (PS) 80 (range 70-100); stage IIIB 34%, stage IV 61%, recurrent disease 5%; histology - epidermoid 29%, adenocarcinoma 53%, other NSCLC 18%. The characteristics of the patients in the two arms were well matched. The following response rates were observed in regimens A and B, respectively: complete response (CR) 0.7% and 3.7%, partial response (PR) 31.9% and 22.2% (P = 0.321). Median CR+PR duration was 8 months in both arms. Clinical benefit represented by an improvement in symptoms was evident in 25.7% and 28.1%, respectively. Median TTP was 5 months in both arms and median OS 11 months in both arms. Grade III-IV neutropenia occurred in 30.7% and 17.7% of the patients in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.017); thrombocytopenia occurred in 0% and 9.3% (P = 0.004), respectively. No difference in the incidence of anaemia was observed. Non-haematological toxicity was generally mild: a higher incidence of grade 1-2 peripheral neurotoxicity and grade 1-2 local toxicity with regimen A and grade 1-2 liver toxicity with regimen B was reported. A pharmaco-economic comparison showed a difference between the two doublets, principally due to the different costs of VNR and GEM. Under the study conditions the combination of VNR or GEM with the same dose and schedule of CP produced similar OR, clinical benefits, TTP and OS in advanced NSCLC, and only mild toxicological differences were observed. Pharmaco-economic evaluation favoured the CP + VNR doublet.

Population-based pharmacoeconomic model for adopting capecitabine/docetaxel combination treatment for anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To model the cost-effectiveness of adopting capecitabine/docetaxel combination therapy in place of single-agent taxane therapy for women in the province of Ontario, Canada, receiving treatment for anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: Clinical effectiveness and economic data were combined in a population model, from the perspective of a universal health care system. Estimates of clinical effectiveness and medical resource utilization were derived prospectively during a phase III randomized controlled trial comparing single-agent docetaxel with capecitabine/docetaxel combination therapy. Population data were obtained from the Cancer Care Ontario Registry and provincial prescription claims data. RESULTS: During 1999-2000, 542 patients were eligible for taxane monotherapy. As capecitabine/docetaxel treatment confers a median 3-month survival benefit compared with docetaxel monotherapy, the projected survival gain in these patients was 136 life-years. The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrate that the survival benefit provided by the addition of capecitabine to single-agent docetaxel is afforded at a small incremental cost of Canadian $3,691 per life-year gained. Hospitalization costs for treatment of adverse events were less for patients receiving capecitabine/docetaxel combination therapy than for those receiving docetaxel monotherapy. The results were robust for adjustments in treatment costs and adverse effects costs. CONCLUSION: Due to its 3-month survival gain and small incremental treatment cost, capecitabine/docetaxel is judged to be a highly cost-effective treatment in anthracycline-pretreated advanced breast cancer. From the perspective of the Ontario health care system, the addition of capecitabine to docetaxel in this patient population is a clinically appropriate and economically acceptable treatment strategy.

[Cost-effectiveness analysis: a reader's guide]. / L'analyse coût-efficacité: un guide de lecture.

INTRODUCTION: This article is devoted to the critical appraisal of cost-effectiveness analysis. METHODS: The example chosen concerns the choice of first line chemotherapy for a patient with stage IV non small cell bronchial carcinoma; a common problem in thoracic oncology. It compares three chemotherapy regimes: vinorelbine alone, cisplatin-vinorelbine and cisplatin-vindesine. PERSPECTIVES: The guide used allows evaluation of the validity of the methodology and, therefore, of the results obtained. CONCLUSION: The article studies the possible application of these results to the patient whose clinical history was presented as an introduction. The limitations of cost-effectiveness analyses are also considered.

Mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells with vinorelbine and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in multiple myeloma patients is reliable and cost effective.

Cyclophosphamide with granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is commonly used to mobilize stem cells in multiple myeloma. Timing of collection is variable and incidence and severity of side effects is substantial. To optimize timing of collection, to reduce side effects and to limit costs of the procedure, we evaluated vinorelbine, a drug shown to have activity in multiple myeloma, in combination with G-CSF as mobilizing regimen. A total of 19 consecutive patients with advanced stage multiple myeloma received one dose of vinorelbine 35 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 in an outpatient setting and G-CSF 10 microg/kg/day from day 4 divided in two daily doses. Median CD34+ cell blood counts measured on day 8 of mobilization were 142 x 10(6)/l (range 57-467). One 15-l apheresis on day 8 resulted in sufficient stem cells (median 11.1 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, range 6.2-36.0 prior and median 7.5 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, range 4.0-20.2 post-positive CD34+ cell selection) for transplantation. Hematopoietic recovery was swift with ANC >0.5 x 10(9)/l on day 11 median (range 10-15) and platelets >20 x 10(9)/l on day 12 median (range 10-15) after reinfusion of the stem cells on day 0. No episodes of febrile neutropenia were observed during mobilization. In our institutions cost reduction for the procedure was about 1700 euros compared to the mobilization with cyclophosphamide and G-CSF. Vinorelbine and G-CSF allow precise timing and harvesting of sufficient stem cells, and might be an alternative to cyclophosphamide in the mobilization of stem cells for autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma.

Cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy for nonsmall-cell lung cancer.

After decades of research into its prevention and treatment, lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in North America and Europe. Approximately 75% of all new lung cancer diagnoses are of the nonsmall-cell subtype, and less than 25% of these patients are potentially operable upon first detection. First-generation cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens for patients with metastatic disease achieved a median survival of 175 days, with 15 to 20% of patients alive at 1 year.In recent years, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and docetaxel have emerged as promising agents in the treatment of advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer. Evidence from randomized trials demonstrates that when these agents are combined with cisplatin, the objective tumor response is 25 to 40%, with a median overall survival approaching 300 days. In addition, recent studies have shown that single-agent docetaxel improves survival and quality of life in patients with platinum-refractory nonsmall-cell lung cancer. Since these modest but important improvements in the management of nonsmall-cell lung cancer are achieved at a significant cost, cost has emerged as a major consideration in health policy decision-making. This article reviews the pharmacoeconomic literature to provide guidance on the cost-effective use of chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer.