Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 23(1): 49, 2023 Jan 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36653848

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted treatments have improved the health outcomes of patients with advanced melanoma. However, due to the high cost of novel therapies, it is crucial to evaluate their value by considering both effectiveness and cost. To compare the cost-effectiveness of these novel agents (atezolizumab-vemurafenib-cobimetinib, vemurafenib-plus-cobimetinib, dabrafenib-plus-trametinib, and encorafenib-plus-binimetinib) for first-line treatment of metastatic melanoma with the BRAFV600 mutation. METHODS: A patient-level model was developed to project the health outcomes of 4 strategies for patients with advanced melanoma. We estimated transition probabilities from the IMspire150 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672), COMBI-AD (NCT01682083), and COLUMBUS (NCT01909453) trials using a parametric survival model. All health outcomes, including direct cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), were estimated from the US payer perspective. Lifetime cost, QALYs, life-years (LYs), and ICERs were calculated. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test model robustness, along with multiple scenario analyses. RESULTS: Of the 4 competing strategies, atezolizumab-vemurafenib-cobimetinib produced the best health outcomes, and the vemurafenib-cobimetinib strategy was the least expensive option. Atezolizumab-vemurafenib-cobimetinib, dabrafenib-plus-trametinib, and vemurafenib-cobimetinib formed the cost-effective frontier, indicating that the ordered ICERs were $325,113/QALYs for dabrafenib-plus-trametinib vs. vemurafenib-cobimetinib strategies and $2,247,500/QALYs for atezolizumab-vemurafenib-cobimetinib vs. dabrafenib-plus-trametinib strategies. Encorafenib-plus-binimetinib was dominated by the other 3 competing strategies. The drug price and first-line utility significantly influenced the model utcomes. CONCLUSIONS: For BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma, the vemurafenib-cobimetinib strategy could be considered the most cost-effective treatment at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000.


Assuntos
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Humanos , Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico/uso terapêutico , Vemurafenib/efeitos adversos , Análise Custo-Benefício , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas B-raf/genética , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas B-raf/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Melanoma/tratamento farmacológico , Melanoma/genética , Melanoma/patologia , Neoplasias Cutâneas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutâneas/genética , Neoplasias Cutâneas/patologia
2.
Cancer ; 123(14): 2634-2641, 2017 Jul 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28301684

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab is a new standard of care for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and provides an overall survival benefit of 5.40 months in comparison with everolimus. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab for the second-line treatment of mRCC from the perspective of US payers and identified the range of drug costs for which the addition of nivolumab to standard therapy could be considered cost-effective from a Chinese perspective. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was constructed to estimate lifetime costs, life-years, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were estimated for the US and Chinese health care systems. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Nivolumab provided an additional 0.29 QALYs at a cost of $151,676/QALY in the United States. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY, at the current cost of nivolumab, the chance of nivolumab being cost-effective was 3.10%. For China, when nivolumab cost less than $7.90 or $9.70/mg, there was a nearly 90% likelihood that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for nivolumab would be less than $22,785 or $48,838/QALY, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For the United States, nivolumab is unlikely to be a high-value treatment for mRCC at the current price, and a price reduction appears to be justified. In China, value-based prices for nivolumab are $7.90 and $9.70/mg for the country and Beijing City, respectively. This study could and should inform the multilateral drug-price negotiations in China that may be upcoming for nivolumab. Cancer 2017;123:2634-41. © 2017 American Cancer Society.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Carcinoma de Células Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Anticorpos Monoclonais/economia , Antineoplásicos/economia , Carcinoma de Células Renais/patologia , China , Análise Custo-Benefício , Custos e Análise de Custo , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Custos de Medicamentos , Everolimo/economia , Everolimo/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , Modelos Econômicos , Nivolumabe , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...