Isogai P.K.,Sunnybrook Research Institute |
Smith T.J.,Sunnybrook Health science Center |
Smith T.J.,Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center |
Mittmann N.,Sunnybrook Research Institute |
And 4 more authors.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
BackgroundFebrile neutropenia is a serious toxicity of cancer chemotherapy that is usually treated in hospital. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of filgrastim and pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis against febrile neutropenia in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients undergoing chemotherapy.MethodsWe used a Markov model that followed patients through induction chemotherapy to compare the three prophylaxis strategies: 1) no primary prophylaxis against febrile neutropenia; 2) primary prophylaxis with 10 days of filgrastim therapy; and 3) primary prophylaxis with a single dose of pegfilgrastim. The target population was a hypothetical cohort of 64-year-old men and women with DLBCL. Data sources included published literature and current clinical practice. The analysis was conducted from a publicly funded health-care system perspective. The main outcome measures included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).ResultsIn the base-case analysis, costs associated with no primary prophylaxis, primary prophylaxis with 10 days of filgrastim, and primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim were CaD $7314, CaD $13947, and CaD $16290, respectively. The QALYs associated with the three strategies were 0.2004, 0.2015, and 0.2024, respectively. The ICER for the filgrastim vs no primary prophylaxis strategy was CaD $5796000 per QALY. The ICER for the pegfilgrastim vs filgrastim primary prophylaxis strategy was CaD $2611000 per QALY. All one-way sensitivity analyses yielded ICERs greater than CaD $400000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves show that 20.0% of iterations are cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of CaD $1595000 for the filgrastim strategy and CaD $561000 for the pegfilgrastim strategy.ConclusionsPrimary prophylaxis against febrile neutropenia with either filgrastim or pegfilgrastim is not cost-effective in DLBCL patients. © 2013 The Author. Source
Hoch J.S.,Pharmacoeconomics Research Unit
BACKGROUND: Current treatment of diffuse-large-B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) includes rituximab, an expensive drug, combined with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy. Economic models have predicted rituximab plus CHOP (RCHOP) to be a cost-effective alternative to CHOP alone as first-line treatment of DLBCL, but it remains unclear what its real-world costs and cost-effectiveness are in routine clinical practice.METHODS: We performed a population-based retrospective cohort study from 1997 to 2007, using linked administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, to evaluate the costs and cost-effectiveness of RCHOP compared to CHOP alone. A historical control cohort (n = 1,099) with DLBCL who received CHOP before rituximab approval was hard-matched on age and treatment intensity and then propensity-score matched on sex, comorbidity, and histology to 1,099 RCHOP patients. All costs and outcomes were adjusted for censoring using the inverse probability weighting method. The main outcome measure was incremental cost per life-year gained (LYG).RESULTS: Rituximab was associated with a life expectancy increase of 3.2 months over 5 years at an additional cost of $16,298, corresponding to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $61,984 (95% CI $34,087-$135,890) per LYG. The probability of being cost-effective was 90% if the willingness-to-pay threshold was $100,000/LYG. The cost-effectiveness ratio was most favourable for patients less than 60 years old ($31,800/LYG) but increased to $80,600/LYG for patients 60-79 years old and $110,100/LYG for patients ≥ 80 years old. We found that post-market survival benefits of rituximab are similar to or lower than those reported in clinical trials, while the costs, incremental costs and cost-effectiveness ratios are higher than in published economic models and differ by age.CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that the addition of rituximab to standard CHOP chemotherapy was associated with improvement in survival but at a higher cost, and was potentially cost-effective by standard thresholds for patients <60 years old. However, cost-effectiveness decreased significantly with age, suggesting that rituximab may be not as economically attractive in the very elderly on average. This has important clinical implications regarding age-related use and funding decisions on this drug. Source
Thein H.-H.,University of Toronto |
Thein H.-H.,Ontario Cancer Institute |
Isaranuwatchai W.,Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute |
Campitelli M.A.,University of Toronto |
And 12 more authors.
Although the burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an escalating public health problem, it has not been rigorously estimated within a Canadian context. We conducted a population-based study using Ontario Cancer Registry linked administrative data. The mean net costs of care due to HCC were estimated using a phase of care approach and generalized estimating equations. Using an incidence approach, the mean net costs of care were applied to survival probabilities of HCC patients to estimate 5-year net costs of care and extrapolated to the Canadian population of newly diagnosed HCC patients in 2009. During 2002-2008, 2,341 HCC cases were identified in Ontario. The mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) net costs of HCC care per 30 patient-days (2010 US dollars) were $3,204 ($2,863-$3,545) in the initial phase, $2,055 ($1,734-$2,375) in the continuing care phase, and $7,776 ($5,889-$9,663) in the terminal phase. The mean (95% CI) 5-year net cost of care was $77,509 ($60,410-$94,607) and the 5-year aggregate net cost of care was $106 million ($83-$130 million) (undiscounted). The net costs of patients receiving liver transplantation only and those undergoing surgical resection only were highest in the terminal phase. The net cost of patients receiving radiofrequency ablation as the only treatment was relatively low in the initial phase, and there were no significant differences in the continuing and terminal phases. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that costs attributable to HCC are significant in Canada and expected to increase. Our findings of phase-specific cost estimates by resource categories and type of treatment provide information for future cost-effectiveness analysis of potential innovative interventions, resource allocation, and health care budgeting, and public health policy to improve the health of the population. © 2013 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Source
John-Baptiste A.A.,Womens College Research Institute |
John-Baptiste A.A.,Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute |
John-Baptiste A.A.,Pharmacoeconomics Research Unit |
John-Baptiste A.A.,Canadian Center for Applied Research in Cancer Control |
And 10 more authors.
Background:A key priority in developing policies for providing affordable cancer care is measuring the value for money of new therapies using cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). For CEA to be useful it should focus on relevant outcomes and include thorough investigation of uncertainty. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of five years of aromatase inhibitors (AI) versus five years of tamoxifen in the treatment of post-menopausal women with early stage breast cancer, show benefit of AI in terms of disease free survival (DFS) but not overall survival (OS) and indicate higher risk of fracture with AI. Policy-relevant CEA of AI versus tamoxifen should focus on OS and include analysis of uncertainty over key assumptions.Methods:We conducted a systematic review of published CEAs comparing an AI to tamoxifen. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews without language restrictions. We selected CEAs with outcomes expressed as cost per life year or cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY). We assessed quality using the Neumann checklist. Using structured forms two abstractors collected descriptive information, sources of data, baseline assumptions on effectiveness and adverse events, and recorded approaches to assessing parameter uncertainty, methodological uncertainty, and structural uncertainty.Results:We identified 1,622 citations and 18 studies met inclusion criteria. All CE estimates assumed a survival benefit for aromatase inhibitors. Twelve studies performed sensitivity analysis on the risk of adverse events and 7 assumed no additional mortality risk with any adverse event. Sub-group analysis was limited; 6 studies examined older women, 2 examined women with low recurrence risk, and 1 examined women with multiple comorbidities.Conclusion:Published CEAs comparing AIs to tamoxifen assumed an OS benefit though none has been shown in RCTs, leading to an overestimate of the cost-effectiveness of AIs. Results of these CEA analyses may be suboptimal for guiding policy. © 2013 John-Baptiste et al. Source
Hoch J.S.,Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute |
Brown M.B.,University of Lethbridge |
McMahon C.,Pan Canadian Oncology Drug Review |
Nanson J.,Pan Canadian Oncology Drug Review |
And 2 more authors.
In this interview with the patient representatives on the Expert Review Committee (perc) of the Pan- Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pcodr), those representatives offer their views about how to be a valuable contributing member of Canada’s national cancer drug funding recommendation committee. The article seeks to inform readers, and especially clinicians, about pcodr from the perspective of the patient representatives. © 2014 Multimed Inc. Source