The diagnosis and therapy of colorectal cancer from a pharmacoeconomic perspective
Authors:
D. Mináriková 1; J. Bielik 2; I. Malovecká 1; P. Minárik 3,4; K. Gatialová 1; V. Foltán 1
Authors place of work:
Katedra organizácie a riadenia farmácie, Farmaceutická fakulta UK v Bratislave, Slovenská republika
1; Fakulta zdravotníctva, Trenčianska univerzita Alexandra Dubčeka v Trenčíne, Slovenská republika
2; Oddelenie gastroenterológie, Onkologický ústav sv. Alžbety, s. r. o., Bratislava, Slovenská republika
3; Vysoká škola zdravotníctva a sociálnej práce sv. Alžbety, Bratislava, Slovenská republika
4
Published in the journal:
Gastroent Hepatol 2015; 69(6): 504-508
Category:
Gastrointestinal Oncology: Original Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.14735/amgh2015504
Summary
Malignant tumours of the colon and rectum rank among the most common types of cancer in the population. In 2008 in Slovakia, colorectal cancer was the most common type of cancer in men (14.5%), while in women it was the second most common type of cancer (10.8%). Biological therapy and new anticancer drugs can greatly improve the prognosis of the disease evolution, but they in crease the cost of therapy and require effective provision of oncological health care.
Objective:
The work presents selected pharmacoeconomic data concerning current colorectal cancer therapy and evaluates the cost-effectiveness of aflibercept in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.
Methods:
Cost minimisation analysis was used to compare the efficacy and costs of aflibercept to bevacizumab. Cost utility analysis was used with Markov simulation model for assessing aflibercept in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab in combination with FOLFIRI.
Results:
Treatment with aflibercept results in a saving of 26 Euros from public funds per cycle compared to initiating therapy with bevacizumab. The cost of treatment of one patient with aflibercept in second-line treatment in combination with FOLFIRI throughout their lifetime is 417 Euros lower and this treatment brings 0.03 QALY more than the therapy with bevacizumab in combination with FOLFIRI. The ICUR value for aflibercept + FOLFIRI compared to bevacizumab + FOLFIRI is –15 700 Euros.
Conclusion:
The evaluation of aflibercept’s cost-effectiveness confirms that it is a cost-saving alternative in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer patients and in combination with FOLFIRI it represents a dominant therapeutic strategy. However, for a comprehensive assessment in future analyses it will be necessary to take into account the indirect costs of the given treatment.
Key words:
colorectal cancer – pharmacoeconomics – biological therapy
The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study.
The Editorial Board declares that the manuscript met the ICMJE „uniform requirements“ for biomedical papers.
Submitted:
1. 9. 2015
Accepted:
29. 10. 2015
Zdroje
1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011; 61(2): 69– 90. doi: 10.3322/ caac.20107.
2. Ondrušová M. Epidemiológia zhubných nádorov kolorekta. Farmakoterapia 2012; 2(1): 4– 9.
3. Ondrušová M, Pšenková M. Náklady na vybranú zdravotnú starostlivosť pri metastatickom kolorektálnom karcinóme v Slovenskej republike. Farmakoterapia 2014; 4(1): 67– 72.
4. Bartová V, Dubaj M, Foltán V. Farmakoekonomika kolorektálneho karcinómu. Farmakoekon Liek Polit 2012; 8(3): 48– 49.
5. Dubajová V, Dubaj M, Foltán V. Ekonomický pohľad v rámci diagnostiky a terapie kolorektálneho karcinómu. Klin Farmakol Farm 2010; 24(1): 11– 14. [online]. Dostupné z www.klinickafarmakologie.cz/ pdfs/ far/ 2010/ 01/ 02.pdf.
6. Adam Z, Krejčí M, Vorlíček J et al. Speciální onkologie: příznaky, diagnostika a léčba maligních chorob. 1. vyd. Galén 2010: 71– 80.
7. Fischer C, Mazzone M, Jonckx B et al. FLT1 and its ligands VEGFB and PIGF: drug targets for anti‑angiogenic therapy? Nat Rev Cancer 2008; 8(12): 942– 956. doi: 10.1038/ nrc2524.
8. Loupakis F, Cremolini C, Fioravanti A et al. Pharmacodynamic and pharmacogenetic angiogenesis‑related markers of first‑line Folfoxiri plus bevacizumab schedule in metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 2011; 104(8): 1262– 1269. doi: 10.1038/ bjc.2011.85.
9. Bennouna J, Sastre J, Arnold D et al. Continuation of bevacizumab after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (ML18147): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2013; 14(1): 29– 37. doi: 10.1016/ S1470‑2045(12)70477‑1.
10. Van Cutsem E, Tabernero J, Lakomy R et al. Addition of aflibercept to fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan improves survival in a phase III randomized trial in patients with mCRC previously treated with an oxaliplatin‑based regimen. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(28): 3499– 3506.
11. He K, Cui B, Li G et al. The effect of anti‑VEGF drugs (bevacizumab and aflibercept) on the survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Onco Targets Ther 2012; 5: 59– 65. doi: 10.2147/ OTT.S29719.
12. Ondrušová M, Pšenková M. Prieskum manažmentu liečby a nákladovosti metastatického kolorektálneho karcinómu. Pharm‑ In 2013. [online]. Dostupné z http://kategorizacia.mzsr.sk/ Lieky/ Download/ RequestAttachment/ 14990.
13. Cartwright TH. Adverse events associated with antiangiogenic agents in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer and their management. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2013; 12(2): 86– 94. doi: 10.1016/ j.clcc.2012.12.001.
14. Linke Z. Aflibercept v léčbě metastatického kolorektálního karcinomu. In: Farmakoterapie v praxi, Suplementum onkologie 1/ 2014. [online]. Dostupné z http:/ / www.farmakoterapievpraxi.cz/ dokumenty/ farmakoterapievpraxi/ FTvP_2014_suppl_01.pdf.
15. Hind D, Tappenden P, Tumur I et al. The use of irinotecan, oxaliplatin and raltitrexed for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2008; 12(15): 162.
16. Pandor A, Eggington S, Paisley S et al. The clinical and cost‑effectiveness of oxaliplatin and capecitabine for the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer: systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2006; 10(41): 1– 185.
17. Tappenden P, Jones R, Paisley S et al. Systematic review and economic evaluation of bevacizumab and cetuximab for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11(12): 1– 128.
18. Aitini E, Rossi A, Morselli P et al. Economic comparison of capecitabine + oxaliplatin and 5- fluorouracil + oxaliplatin in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer. Cancer Manag Res 2012; 4: 99– 103. doi: 10.2147/ CMAR.S29267.
19. Maniadakis N, Fragoulakis V, Pectasides D et al. XELOX versus FOLFOX6 as an adjuvant treatment in colorectal cancer: an economic analysis. Curr Med Res Opin 2009; 25(3): 797– 805. doi: 10.1185/ 03007990902719117.
20. Perrocheau G, Bennouna J, Ducreux M et al. Cost‑minimisation analysis in first‑line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in France: XELOX versus FOLFOX‑ 6. Oncology 2010; 79(3– 4): 174– 180. doi: 10.1159/ 000325999.
Štítky
Paediatric gastroenterology Gastroenterology and hepatology SurgeryČlánok vyšiel v časopise
Gastroenterology and Hepatology
2015 Číslo 6
- Metamizole at a Glance and in Practice – Effective Non-Opioid Analgesic for All Ages
- Metamizole vs. Tramadol in Postoperative Analgesia
- Spasmolytic Effect of Metamizole
- Possibilities of Using Metamizole in the Treatment of Acute Primary Headaches
- Current Insights into the Antispasmodic and Analgesic Effects of Metamizole on the Gastrointestinal Tract
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- Ursodeoxycholic acid (Ursosan® capsules)
- Exclusive enteral nutrition – first-line therapy of Crohn’s disease in children
- The results of liver transplantation in Slovak children
- The importance of genetic testing in children with idiopathic chronic pancreatitis