COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF OLAPARIB AS A MAINTENANCE TREATMENT OPTION FOR NEWLY DIAGNOSED BRCA-MUTATED OVARIAN CANCER WHO ARE IN RESPONSE AFTER FIRST-LINE PLATINUM-BASED CHEMOTHERAPY IN PANAMA
Author(s)
Castillo-Fernandez O1, Murtiera S2, Solorzano J2, Martin C1, Amador Sosa JL1, Lim Law M1, Véliz Centella I1, Cercone J3, Leon A4
1Instituto Oncologico Nacional, Panama, Panama, 2AstraZeneca CAMCAR MAC, San José, Costa Rica, 3Sanigest Internacional, San Jose, Costa Rica, 4Sanigest Internacional, San Jose, FL, Costa Rica
OBJECTIVES: SOLO1 was an international, Phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that assessed the efficacy and safety of olaparib (OLA) versus placebo in patients with newly diagnosed advanced BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer who were in response (complete or partial) following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The acquisition cost of new oncology drugs is a concern for payors in emerging markets. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of OLA therapy in this new indication versus routine surveillance (RS) in the Panamian population, using national estimates of costs and treatment patterns. METHODS: A three-state partitioned survival model was developed to simulate the lifetime (50 years) incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of OLA versus RS from a payer perspective. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) curves were estimated using data from SOLO1 and extrapolated using parametric survival models for Panama. Mortality and morbidity rates for the groups were modelled based on assumptions validated with local clinicians. Health state utilities and adverse event frequencies were obtained from SOLO1 study. Drug costs were provided by the Panamian Institute of Oncology (ION). Healthcare resource usage and costs were based on local clinician input and local publications. A 1.5% discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. RESULTS: Maintenance treatment with OLA in first line setting after platinum based chemotherapy compared to routine surveillance as currently practiced was associated with an ICER of $ $35,512 per QALY. This ICER is lower than the WHO-WTP threshold of three times GDP per capita of $$48,736 and the willingness-to-pay (WTP) analysis showed an estimated 100% probability to be cost-effective. The results were robust to univariate sensitivity analysis, with all variables having a non-significant impact. CONCLUSIONS: OLA is a cost-effective treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer, who are in response (complete or partial) after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in Panama.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2020-05, ISPOR 2020, Orlando, FL, USA
Value in Health, Volume 23, Issue 5, S1 (May 2020)
Code
PCN85
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Economic Evaluation, Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Technology Assessment
Topic Subcategory
Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy, Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis, Decision & Deliberative Processes, Reimbursement & Access Policy
Disease
Oncology
Explore Related HEOR by Topic