A cost-effectiveness analysis of trastuzumab-containing treatment sequences for HER-2 positive metastatic breast cancer patients in Taiwan.
Ado-Trastuzumab Emtansine
/ administration & dosage
Adult
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
/ administration & dosage
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ administration & dosage
Breast Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Capecitabine
/ administration & dosage
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Docetaxel
/ administration & dosage
Female
Humans
Lapatinib
/ administration & dosage
Markov Chains
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Metastasis
/ drug therapy
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Receptor, ErbB-2
/ metabolism
Taiwan
Trastuzumab
/ administration & dosage
Breast cancer
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Markov chains
Neoplasm metastasis
Taiwan
Journal
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland)
ISSN: 1532-3080
Titre abrégé: Breast
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9213011
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
18
07
2019
revised:
11
11
2019
accepted:
20
11
2019
pubmed:
6
12
2019
medline:
20
11
2020
entrez:
6
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Treatment options for HER-2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients have expanded markedly since trastuzumab approval in 1998. Several other regimens are now available, including pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel, T-DM1, capecitabine plus lapatinib, and trastuzumab plus lapatinib. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of four treatment sequences for HER-2-positive mBC according to the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration (TNHIA). Costs (U.S. Dollars) and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life years) of four treatment sequences for HER-2-positive mBC patients were examined using a Markov model over a lifetime horizon. Transition probabilities, disease progression, and probability of adverse events and survival were derived from clinical trial data. Costs and health utilities were estimated from TNHIA, Taipei Medical University Hospital, and the literature. Deterministic, probabilistic sensitivity analyses and a scenario analysis examined parameter uncertainty and accounted for drug wastage in dosage and cost calculations. Sequence 3 (1st line: trastuzumab plus docetaxel; 2nd line: T-DM1; 3rd line: trastuzumab plus lapatinib) was the most cost-effective sequence followed by sequence 1 (1st line: pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel; 2nd line: T-DM1; 3rd line: capecitabine plus lapatinib), and sequence 4 (1st line: trastuzumab plus docetaxel; 2nd line: trastuzumab plus lapatinib; 3rd line: trastuzumab plus capecitabine), respectively. The model was sensitive to costs and transition probabilities, but not particularly sensitive to the wastage assumption. From the perspective of the TNHIA, trastuzumab plus docetaxel as 1st line followed by T-DM1 and trastuzumab plus lapatinib as 2nd and 3rd line represents the most cost-effective strategy among the four sequences considered for treating HER-2-positive mBC patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31805500
pii: S0960-9776(19)31104-X
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2019.11.012
pmc: PMC7375554
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
0
Lapatinib
0VUA21238F
Docetaxel
15H5577CQD
Capecitabine
6804DJ8Z9U
ERBB2 protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
Receptor, ErbB-2
EC 2.7.10.1
pertuzumab
K16AIQ8CTM
Trastuzumab
P188ANX8CK
Ado-Trastuzumab Emtansine
SE2KH7T06F
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
141-148Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no competing interests.
Références
Glob Health Action. 2018;11(1):1447828
pubmed: 29564962
Lung Cancer. 2008 Dec;62(3):374-80
pubmed: 18467000
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018 Oct;16(10):1216-1247
pubmed: 30323092
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Jul 1;32(19):2078-99
pubmed: 24799465
Health Econ. 2010 Apr;19(4):422-37
pubmed: 19382128
J Clin Oncol. 2015 May 10;33(14):1564-73
pubmed: 25605838
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
Oncologist. 2009 Apr;14(4):320-68
pubmed: 19346299
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008 Oct 21;6:84
pubmed: 18939982
N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 28;371(9):796-7
pubmed: 25162885
Bull World Health Organ. 2016 Dec 1;94(12):925-930
pubmed: 27994285
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2012 Sep;8(3):282-91
pubmed: 22898238
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Nov;160(1):187-196
pubmed: 27654970
Science. 1987 Jan 9;235(4785):177-82
pubmed: 3798106
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Apr 20;27(12):1999-2006
pubmed: 19289619
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Mar 1;28(7):1124-30
pubmed: 20124187
J Oncol Pract. 2018 Sep;14(9):e533-e546
pubmed: 30138052
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018 Apr;18(2):207-213
pubmed: 28965422
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Nov 10;32(32):3634-42
pubmed: 25267757
Value Health. 2010 Sep-Oct;13(6):743-9
pubmed: 20561327
Lancet Oncol. 2013 May;14(6):461-71
pubmed: 23602601
Curr Med Res Opin. 2016 Jun;32(6):991-6
pubmed: 26824145
Cancer. 2007 Aug 1;110(3):489-98
pubmed: 17592827
Oncotarget. 2017 Mar 7;8(10):16939-16950
pubmed: 28199975
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jan 12;366(2):109-19
pubmed: 22149875
J Med Econ. 2016 Oct;19(10):923-7
pubmed: 27135256
N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 28;355(26):2733-43
pubmed: 17192538
Health Technol Assess. 2015 Feb;19(14):1-503, v-vi
pubmed: 25692211
BMC Cancer. 2011 Aug 22;11:364
pubmed: 21859480
Oncologist. 2010;15(9):924-34
pubmed: 20736298
Br J Cancer. 2006 Sep 18;95(6):683-90
pubmed: 16967055
Curr Oncol. 2014 Feb;21(1):e41-51
pubmed: 24523620
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012 Jan;28(1):12-21
pubmed: 22617734
N Engl J Med. 2012 Nov 8;367(19):1783-91
pubmed: 23020162
London J Prim Care (Abingdon). 2010 Dec;3(2):115-9
pubmed: 25949636
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2007 Sep;7(9):1183-92
pubmed: 17892419
Med Decis Making. 2012 Sep-Oct;32(5):733-43
pubmed: 22990088
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Jul 03;14:287
pubmed: 24989615