• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus pemetrexed plus cisplatin as first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: cost minimization analysis in 12 European countries

F. Grossi, J. Bennouna, L. Havel, M. Hochmair, T. Almodovar,

. 2016 ; 32 (9) : 1577-84. [pub] 20160707

Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu klinické zkoušky, fáze II, časopisecké články, multicentrická studie, randomizované kontrolované studie

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc17031709

OBJECTIVE: A combination of vinorelbine and cisplatin is a standard treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer; oral vinorelbine is registered in 45 countries. Pemetrexed and cisplatin are recommended in front-line chemotherapy of non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC). The objective of this study was to conduct a cost minimization analysis from the perspective of the national health service (NHS) in each of 12 European countries, based on a randomized phase II study in NS-NSCLC (NAVoTRIAL01), with 100 oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin patients (arm A) and 51 pemetrexed plus cisplatin patients (arm B). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Country-specific costs and DRG codes considered included those relating to anticancer drugs, administration settings (out-patient/in-patient/at home), serious adverse events (defined as involving hospitalization and considered due to anticancer drugs) and concomitant medications. Relevant costs were calculated based on country-specific reimbursement procedures and official tariffs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost and savings per patient. RESULTS: Using the NHS perspective, savings per patient treated with oral vinorelbine ranged from €1317 (Denmark) to €35,001 (Germany). Expressed as percentages, savings per patient treated with oral vinorelbine compared with pemetrexed ranged between 5% (France) and 83% (Czech Republic). Pooled average costs for each treatment arm across the 12 countries resulted in cost savings for payers of €12,871, favoring oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin. CONCLUSIONS: Given the reported efficacy with both regimens, this pan-European economic analysis provides compelling evidence supporting oral vinorelbine use over pemetrexed for the treatment of NS-NSCLC. Oral vinorelbine provides similar efficacy and an easily manageable safety profile at lower overall cost per patient treated, combined with an easier/more convenient mode of administration. Sensitivity analysis across varied scenarios demonstrated the robustness of the results. The principle weakness of our study was its reliance upon a single small scale study to provide efficacy data, since this is the only study conducted in this specific population of patients. Further large scale trials are needed to confirm these results.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc17031709
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20171031101129.0
007      
ta
008      
171025s2016 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1080/03007995.2016.1190700 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)27223813
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Grossi, Francesco $u a Lung Cancer Unit, AOU San Martino IST - Istituto Nazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro , Genova , Italy ;
245    10
$a Oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus pemetrexed plus cisplatin as first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: cost minimization analysis in 12 European countries / $c F. Grossi, J. Bennouna, L. Havel, M. Hochmair, T. Almodovar,
520    9_
$a OBJECTIVE: A combination of vinorelbine and cisplatin is a standard treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer; oral vinorelbine is registered in 45 countries. Pemetrexed and cisplatin are recommended in front-line chemotherapy of non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC). The objective of this study was to conduct a cost minimization analysis from the perspective of the national health service (NHS) in each of 12 European countries, based on a randomized phase II study in NS-NSCLC (NAVoTRIAL01), with 100 oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin patients (arm A) and 51 pemetrexed plus cisplatin patients (arm B). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Country-specific costs and DRG codes considered included those relating to anticancer drugs, administration settings (out-patient/in-patient/at home), serious adverse events (defined as involving hospitalization and considered due to anticancer drugs) and concomitant medications. Relevant costs were calculated based on country-specific reimbursement procedures and official tariffs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost and savings per patient. RESULTS: Using the NHS perspective, savings per patient treated with oral vinorelbine ranged from €1317 (Denmark) to €35,001 (Germany). Expressed as percentages, savings per patient treated with oral vinorelbine compared with pemetrexed ranged between 5% (France) and 83% (Czech Republic). Pooled average costs for each treatment arm across the 12 countries resulted in cost savings for payers of €12,871, favoring oral vinorelbine plus cisplatin. CONCLUSIONS: Given the reported efficacy with both regimens, this pan-European economic analysis provides compelling evidence supporting oral vinorelbine use over pemetrexed for the treatment of NS-NSCLC. Oral vinorelbine provides similar efficacy and an easily manageable safety profile at lower overall cost per patient treated, combined with an easier/more convenient mode of administration. Sensitivity analysis across varied scenarios demonstrated the robustness of the results. The principle weakness of our study was its reliance upon a single small scale study to provide efficacy data, since this is the only study conducted in this specific population of patients. Further large scale trials are needed to confirm these results.
650    12
$a protinádorové látky $x škodlivé účinky $x ekonomika $x terapeutické užití $7 D000970
650    12
$a nemalobuněčný karcinom plic $x farmakoterapie $x epidemiologie $7 D002289
650    12
$a cisplatina $x škodlivé účinky $x ekonomika $x terapeutické užití $7 D002945
650    _2
$a náklady a analýza nákladů $7 D003365
650    _2
$a Evropa $x epidemiologie $7 D005060
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a nádory plic $x farmakoterapie $x epidemiologie $7 D008175
650    _2
$a vinblastin $x škodlivé účinky $x analogy a deriváty $x ekonomika $x terapeutické užití $7 D014747
655    _2
$a klinické zkoušky, fáze II $7 D017427
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
655    _2
$a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
700    1_
$a Bennouna, Jaafar $u b Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest , Nantes , France ;
700    1_
$a Havel, Libor $u c Thomayer Hospital , Prague , Czech Republic ;
700    1_
$a Hochmair, Maximillian $u d Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine , Otto Wagner Hospital , Vienna , Austria ;
700    1_
$a Almodovar, Teresa $u e Serviço de Pneumologia, Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil , Lisboa , Portugal. $7 gn_A_00004644
773    0_
$w MED00009520 $t Current medical research and opinion $x 1473-4877 $g Roč. 32, č. 9 (2016), s. 1577-84
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27223813 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20171025 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20171031101219 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1255302 $s 992736
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2016 $b 32 $c 9 $d 1577-84 $e 20160707 $i 1473-4877 $m Current medical research and opinion $n Curr Med Res Opin $x MED00009520
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20171025

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...