» Articles » PMID: 27399059

Economic Evaluation Study (CHEER-compliant): Cost-effectiveness Analysis of RAS Screening for Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Based on the CALGB 80405 Trial

Overview
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2016 Jul 12
PMID 27399059
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Cetuximab (Cetux)/Bevacizumab (Bev) treatments have shown considerably survival benefits for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the last decade. But they are costly. Currently, no data is available on the health economic implications of testing for extended RAS wild-type (wt) prior to Cetux/Bev treatments of patients with mCRC. This paper aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of predictive testing for extended RAS-wt status in mCRC in the context of targeting the use of Cetux/Bev.Markov model 1 was conducted to provide evidence evaluating the cost-effectiveness of predictive testing for KRAS-wt or extended RAS-wt status based on treatments of chemotherapy plus Cetux/Bev. Markov model 2 assessed the cost-effectiveness of FOLFOX plus Cetux/Bev or FOLFIRI plus Cetux/Bev in extended RAS-wt population. Primary base case data were identified from the CALGB 80405 trial and the literatures. Costs were estimated from West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China. Survival benefits were reported in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated.In analysis 1, the cost per QALY was $88,394.09 for KRAS-Cetux, $80,797.82 for KRAS-Bev, $82,590.72 for RAS-Cetux, and $75,358.42 for RAS-Bev. The ICER for RAS-Cetux versus RAS-Bev was $420,700.50 per QALY gained. In analysis 2, the cost per QALY was $81,572.61, $80,856.50, $80,592.22, and $66,794.96 for FOLFOX-Cetux, FOLFOX-Bev, FOLFIRI-Cetux, and FOLFIRI-Bev, respectively. The analyses showed that the extended RAS-wt testing was less costly and more effective versus KRAS-wt testing before chemotherapy plus Cetux/Bev. Furthermore, FOLFIRI plus Bev was the most cost-effective strategy compared with others in extended RAS-wt population.It was economically favorable to identify patients with extended RAS-wt status. Furthermore, FOLFIRI plus Bev was the preferred strategy in extended RAS-wt patients.

Citing Articles

Using Genomic Heterogeneity to Inform Therapeutic Decisions for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Application of the Value of Heterogeneity Framework.

Pataky R, Peacock S, Bryan S, Sadatsafavi M, Regier D Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2024; .

PMID: 39520611 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00926-9.


Were economic evaluations well reported for the newly listed oncology drugs in China's national reimbursement drug list.

Liu L, Jiang Z, Li F, Wei Y, Ming J, Yang Y BMC Health Serv Res. 2022; 22(1):1475.

PMID: 36463141 PMC: 9719239. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-022-08858-7.


Utility and specificity of plasma heat shock protein 90 alpha, CEA, and CA199 as the diagnostic test in colorectal cancer liver metastasis.

Ding Q, Sun Y, Zhang J, Yao Y, Huang D, Jiang Y J Gastrointest Oncol. 2022; 13(5):2497-2504.

PMID: 36388698 PMC: 9660089. DOI: 10.21037/jgo-22-797.


How are we evaluating the cost-effectiveness of companion biomarkers for targeted cancer therapies? A systematic review.

Seo M, Cairns J BMC Cancer. 2021; 21(1):980.

PMID: 34470603 PMC: 8408935. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08725-4.


Cost-Effectiveness of Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Therapy Bevacizumab in KRAS Wild-Type (WT), Pan-RAS WT, and Pan-RAS WT Left-Sided Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Lee S, Choi H, Chan S, Lam K, Lee V, Wong I Front Oncol. 2021; 11:651299.

PMID: 34012917 PMC: 8127841. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.651299.


References
1.
Murray C, Evans D, Acharya A, Baltussen R . Development of WHO guidelines on generalized cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 2000; 9(3):235-51. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1050(200004)9:3<235::aid-hec502>3.0.co;2-o. View

2.
Welch S, Spithoff K, Rumble R, Maroun J . Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy for patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol. 2009; 21(6):1152-1162. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdp533. View

3.
Ramsey S, Andersen M, Etzioni R, Moinpour C, Peacock S, Potosky A . Quality of life in survivors of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 2000; 88(6):1294-303. View

4.
Heinemann V, Fischer von Weikersthal L, Decker T, Kiani A, Vehling-Kaiser U, Al-Batran S . FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (FIRE-3): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014; 15(10):1065-75. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70330-4. View

5.
Parks R, Gonen M, Kemeny N, Jarnagin W, DAngelica M, DeMatteo R . Adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival after resection of hepatic colorectal metastases: analysis of data from two continents. J Am Coll Surg. 2007; 204(5):753-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.12.036. View