» Articles » PMID: 19332722

Cost Effectiveness of Ixabepilone Plus Capecitabine for Metastatic Breast Cancer Progressing After Anthracycline and Taxane Treatment

Overview
Journal J Clin Oncol
Specialty Oncology
Date 2009 Apr 1
PMID 19332722
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Using data from a recent randomized trial, we evaluated the cost effectiveness of ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in patients with predominantly metastatic breast cancer considered to be taxane-resistant and previously treated with or resistant to an anthracycline.

Methods: We developed a stochastic decision-analytic model to represent data collected in the trial on medical resource use, health-related quality of life, and clinical outcomes. Estimates of overall survival were conditional on level of tumor response. We assigned monthly costs and utility weights according to periods defined by the duration of study treatment, time from discontinuation of the study drug until disease progression, and from progression until death and were specific to the level of response and receipt of subsequent therapy. Medical resources were valued in 2008 US dollars. We performed Monte Carlo simulations and sensitivity analyses to evaluate model uncertainty.

Results: Overall survival was significantly associated with level of tumor response (P < .001). Total costs were estimated at $60,900 for patients receiving ixabepilone plus capecitabine and $30,000 for patients receiving capecitabine alone. The estimated gain in life expectancy with ixabepilone was 1.96 months (95% CI, 1.36 to 2.64 months); the estimated gain in quality-adjusted survival was 1.06 months (95% CI, 0.09 to 2.03 months). The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $359,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (95% CI, $183,000 to $4,030,000). In sensitivity analyses, the results were robust to changes in numerous inputs and assumptions.

Conclusion: Addition of ixabepilone to capecitabine adds approximately $31,000 to overall medical costs and affords approximately 1 additional month of quality-adjusted survival.

Citing Articles

A cost-effectiveness analysis of capecitabine maintenance therapy versus routine follow-up for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer patients after standard treatment from a perspective of Chinese society.

Li J, Lin Z, Wong M, Wang H, Li M, Li S BMC Med. 2022; 20(1):320.

PMID: 36156186 PMC: 9511760. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-022-02516-9.


A Systematic Literature Review of Health Utility Values in Breast Cancer.

Kaur M, Yan J, Klassen A, David J, Pieris D, Sharma M Med Decis Making. 2022; 42(5):704-719.

PMID: 35042379 PMC: 9189726. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X211065471.


Me, Too.

Gyawali B J Glob Oncol. 2017; 2(3):99-104.

PMID: 28717688 PMC: 5495449. DOI: 10.1200/JGO.2015.000588.


Reviewing the quality, health benefit and value for money of chemotherapy and targeted therapy for metastatic breast cancer.

Pouwels X, Ramaekers B, Joore M Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017; 165(3):485-498.

PMID: 28689361 PMC: 5602061. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-017-4374-6.


Use of Intermediate Endpoints in the Economic Evaluation of New Treatments for Advanced Cancer and Methods Adopted When Suitable Overall Survival Data are Not Available.

Beauchemin C, Lapierre M, Letarte N, Yelle L, Lachaine J Pharmacoeconomics. 2016; 34(9):889-900.

PMID: 27002517 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-016-0401-4.