ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF ERLOTINIB, DOCETAXEL AND PEMETREXED AS SECOND LINE TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH ADVANCED NON–SMALL-CELL LUNG CANCER (NSCLC). A COST-MINIMIZATION IN ITALIAN HOSPITALS

Author(s)

Stefano Capri, PhD, Professor1, Alessandro Morabito, MD, Professor2, Guido Carillio, MD, Professor3, Francesco Grossi, MD, Professor4, Raffaele Longo, MD, Professor5, Giulio Cerea, MD, Professor6, Francesca Rossetti, MSc, Researcher71Cattaneo-LIUC University, Castellanza, (Varese), Italy; 2 Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Napoli, NA, Italy; 3 Humanitas Centro Catanese di Oncologia, Catania, CA, Italy; 4 Istituto Nazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro, Genova, GE, Italy; 5 San Filippo Neri, Roma, RM, Italy; 6 Ospedale Niguarda Ca’ Granda, Milano, MI, Italy; 7 ROCHE S.p.A, Monza, MZ, Italy

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the costs of the drug, drug administration and managing of adverse events (AEs) using erlotinib, docetaxel and pemetrexed as second line therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), in the Italian hospital setting. METHODS: Since a clinical study comparing the three therapies is not available, the major clinical findings from randomized trials of each drug were used showing that all three chemotherapies have comparable efficacy results. Therefore a cost-minimization analysis was performed. Costs from the hospital perspective were calculated according to Italian clinical practice. Consumption of each chemotherapy was based on respective clinical trial, while to estimate the resources used in the AEs and for the drug administration a Delphi panel of experts was structured. In order to allow a comparison between an oral daily therapy (erlotinib) and infusion therapies administered every 21 days (docetaxel and pemetrexed), costs were computed on a monthly base. RESULTS: The total per-patient cost for erlotinib was €1669, €2569 for docetaxel and €3324 for pemetrexed for one month therapy from the hospital perspective. The cost of AEs represents the 8%, 18%, and 3% of the total cost for erlotinib, docetaxel and pemetrexed. Sensitivity analysis showed that no reasonable changes in the quantity and cost of services reduced the savings associated with erlotinib by more than 33%. CONCLUSION: A cost-minimization analysis was performed to assess the cost of three second line chemotherapies in non-small cell lung cancer. The less costly alternative was erlotinib which could produce savings between 40% an 50% of total hospital costs in Italy.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2007-10, ISPOR Europe 2007, Dublin, Ireland

Value in Health, Vol. 10, No. 6 (November/December 2007)

Code

PCN36

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies, Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis

Disease

Oncology

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×