...
首页> 外文期刊>Value in health: the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research >Cost-Effectiveness and Value of Information of Erlotinib, Afatinib, and Cisplatin-Pemetrexed for First-Line Treatment of Advanced EGFR Mutation-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the United States
【24h】

Cost-Effectiveness and Value of Information of Erlotinib, Afatinib, and Cisplatin-Pemetrexed for First-Line Treatment of Advanced EGFR Mutation-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the United States

机译:厄洛替尼,阿法替尼和顺铂-培美曲塞用于美国一线治疗晚期EGFR突变阳性非小细胞肺癌的一线治疗的成本效果和价值

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: To determine the cost-effectiveness of tyrosine kinase inhibitors erlotinib or afatinib, or chemotherapy cisplatin-pemetrexed, for first-line treatment of advanced epithelial growth factor receptor mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in the United States. We also assessed the expected benefit of further research to reduce uncertainty regarding which treatment is optimal. Methods: We developed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of erlotinib, afatinib, and cisplatin-pemetrexed. Model transition and adverse-effect probabilities were from two published phase III trials: EURTAC (Erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation positive non-small-cell lung cancer) and LUX-Lung (Afatinib versus cisplatin-based chemotherapy for EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma) 3. EURTAC survival estimates were corrected for patients entering the trial with more severe disease, compared with LUX-Lung 3. Health utilities and costs were from national estimates or the published literature. Inputs were modeled as distributions for probabilistic sensitivity analysis and expected value of perfect information (EVRI) analysis to estimate the expected benefit of reducing uncertainty regarding the decision of optimal treatment. Results: In the base case, both tyrosine kinase inhibitors were more cost-effective than cisplatin-pemetrexed. Erlotinib had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $61,809/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) compared with afatinib. The acceptability curve showed that erlotinib was the optimal treatment at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY (10-year population EVPI = $85.9 million). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY to $70,000/QALY (EVPI = $211.5 million-$261.8 million), however, there was considerable uncertainty whether erlotinib or afatinib was the optimal treatment Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that erlotinib is the preferred first-line treatment for advanced epithelial growth factor receptor mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Further research comparing erlotinib and afatinib is potentially justified, although accurate data are needed on the required cost and sample size of the trial.
机译:目的:确定酪氨酸激酶抑制剂厄洛替尼或阿法替尼,或顺铂-培美曲塞化疗,在美国用于一线治疗晚期上皮生长因子受体突变阳性的非小细胞肺癌的成本效益。我们还评估了进一步研究的预期收益,以减少关于哪种治疗最佳的不确定性。方法:我们开发了一个马尔可夫模型来比较厄洛替尼,阿法替尼和顺铂培美曲塞的成本效益。模型转换和不良反应概率来自两项已发表的三期试验:EURTAC(厄洛替尼与标准化疗作为晚期EGFR突变阳性非小细胞肺癌欧洲患者的一线治疗)和LUX-Lung(阿法替尼与顺铂) EGFR突变阳性肺腺癌的化疗方案)3.与LUX-Lung相比,对进入更严重疾病的患者的EURTAC生存率估计值进行了校正。3.卫生事业和费用来自国家估计值或已发表的文献。将输入建模为概率敏感性分析和完美信息期望值(EVRI)分析的分布,以估计减少关于最佳治疗决策的不确定性的预期收益。结果:在基本情况下,两种酪氨酸激酶抑制剂的成本效益均高于顺铂-培美曲塞。与阿法替尼相比,厄洛替尼的成本效益比增加/质量调整生命年(QALY)为61,809美元。可接受性曲线表明,在愿意支付的门槛为100,000美元/ QALY(10年人口EVPI = 8590万美元)时,厄洛替尼是最佳治疗方案。在支付意愿阈值为50,000 / QALY到70,000 / QALY(EVPI = 2.115亿-2.618亿美元)的情况下,是否存在最佳治疗方案存在很大的不确定性结论:我们的分析表明,首选厄洛替尼晚期上皮生长因子受体突变阳性的非小细胞肺癌的一线治疗。尽管需要有关试验的所需成本和样本量的准确数据,但将埃洛替尼和阿法替尼进行比较的进一步研究可能是合理的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号