Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Gefitinib Plus Chemotherapy Versus Gefitinib Alone for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with EGFR Mutations in China

Bairong Shen,Li Chen,Javier Meana

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/mol2net-07-11615

2021-01-01

Abstract:Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of gefitinib

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

[The Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gefitinib or Erlotinib in the Treatment of Advanced EGFR Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients].

Yuxiang Ma,Yan Huang,Hongyun Zhao,Junling Liu,Likun Chen,Haiying Wu,Ningning Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2013.04.06

2013-01-01

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Targeted therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) had become a research hotspot. Both of gefitinib and erlotinib had already been recommended as first line treatment in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutant advanced NSCLC patients. The study aimed to compare the effectiveness and prognosis of advanced NSCLC with gefitinib or erlotinib, as well as the cost-effectiveness ratio of the two drugs. METHODS:Data of 66 EGFR mutant NSCLC patients who were included in Guangzhou medical insurance were analyzed. The efficacy and adverse reactions were evaluated. All the patients were followed-up regularly and the cost of the treatment was recorded. RESULTS:The median progression free survival (PFS) of all patients was 15.0 months. 49 patients received gefintib and 17 patients had erlotinib. The PFS for the two groups of patients was 17.5 month and 13 months, respectively (P=0.459). 31 (62.3%) patients had rash in gefitinib group, 16 (94.1%) in erlotinib group. Cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) in gefitinib group was 3,027 RMB per month, while 6,800 RMB in erlotinib group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICEA) of erlotinib was 2.25 times of gefitinib. CONCLUSIONS:For EGFR mutant advanced NSCLC patients, equal efficacy and survival benefit were observed in patients with gefitinib and erlotinib. The adverse reaction was milder in gefitinib group than that of erlotinib group. And with Guangzhou medical insurance, gefitinib had a superior cost-effectiveness ratio.
Comprehensive Comparison Between Adjuvant Targeted Therapy and Chemotherapy for EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Patients: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Wenqian Li,Hanfei Guo,Lingyu Li,Jiuwei Cui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.619376

IF: 4.7

2021-01-01

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:Background Chemotherapy has been the current standard adjuvant treatment for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, while recent studies showed benefits of epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI). We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to comprehensively evaluate the benefit of EGFR-TKI compared with chemotherapy for early-stage EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients after resection from the perspective of the Chinese health care system. Method A Markov model was established. Clinical data were based on the phase 3, ADJUVANT trial, where stage II-IIIA, EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients were randomized into gefitinib group or chemotherapy group after resection. Cost parameters mainly included costs of drugs, examinations, and adverse events (AEs). Effect parameters were evaluated by quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Outcomes contained incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER), average cost-effective ratio (ACER), and net benefit. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set as 3 times per capita gross domestic product ($30,828/QALY). Sensitivity analyses were also conducted to verify the stability of the model. Results Patients who received gefitinib had both a higher cost ($12,057.98 vs. $11,883.73) and a higher QALY (1.55 vs. 1.42) than patients who received chemotherapy. With an ICER of $1,345.62/QALY, adjuvant gefitinib was of economic benefit compared with chemotherapy. The ACER and net benefit were also consistent (gefitinib vs. chemotherapy, ACER: $7,802.30/QALY vs. $8,392.77/QALY; net benefit: $35,584.85 vs. $31,767.17). Sensitivity analyses indicated the stability of the model and the impact of utility. Conclusion Adjuvant EGFR-TKI application for early-stage EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients was cost-effective compared with chemotherapy, which might provide a reference for clinical decision-making and medical insurance policy formulation in China.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of EGFR Mutation Testing and Afatinib Versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin As First-Line Therapy for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in China

Ruxu You,Jinyu Liu,David Bin-Chia Wu,XinYu Qian,Boxiang Lyu,Yu Zhang,Nan Luo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/cmar.s219722

2019-01-01

Cancer Management and Research

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the combined use of afatinib and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) testing versus gemcitabine-cisplatin as the first-line treatment for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in China.METHODS:A decision-analytic model, based on clinical phase III trials, was developed to simulate patient transitions. Direct costs were estimated from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated over a 5-year lifetime horizon. Model robustness was conducted in sensitivity analyses.RESULTS:For the base case, EGFR mutation testing followed by afatinib treatment for advanced NSCLC increased 0.15 QALYs compared with standard chemotherapy at an additional cost of $5069.12. The ICER for afatinib maintenance was $33,416.39 per QALY gained. The utility of PFS and the cost of afatinib had the most important impact on the ICER. Scenario analyses suggested that when a patient assistance program (PAP) was available, ICER decreased to $22,972.52/QALY lower than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of China ($26,508/QALY).CONCLUSION:Our results suggest that gene-guided maintenance therapy with afatinib with the PAP might be a cost-effective treatment option compared with gemcitabine - cisplatin in China.
Cost-effectiveness of Afatinib, Gefitinib, Erlotinib and Pemetrexed-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatments for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China.

J. Zhu,M. Ye,J. Fu,B. Wu,Y. Chu,Y. Zhao,Y. Zhang,D. Kuo,B. Su

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.11.029

IF: 6.081

2018-01-01

Lung Cancer

Abstract:PURPOSE:Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) are becoming the standard treatments for Chinese patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring an EGFR mutation. However, the economic impact is unclear yet in China.MATERIALS AND METHODS:A decision-analytic model was developed to simulate 1-month patient transitions in a 10-year time horizon from Chinese heath care system perspective. The health and economic outcomes of four first-line strategies (pemetrexed plus cisplatin [PC], gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib) among NSCLC patients harboring EGFR mutations were estimated and assessed via indirect comparisons. Costs in the Chinese setting were estimated by using local hospital data and literatures. A 5% annual discount rate was applied to both costs and outcomes. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity analyses were performed.RESULTS:Afatinib achieved additional 0.382, 0.216 and 0.174 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) with marginal $7930, $3680 and $2818 costs in comparison with PC, gefitinib and erlotinib, which resulted in the ICERs of $20,758, $17,693 and $16,197 per QALY gained, respectively. The hazard ratios (HR) of overall survival (OS) of afatinib against gefitinib, erlotinib and PC strategy had substantial influential parameters.CONCLUSIONS:First-line afatinib is cost-effective compared with gefitinib, erlotinib and PC treatment for Chinese patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC.
A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of gefitinib for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Shuang ZHAO,Wenliang QIAO,Zhixin QIU,Lei LI,Weimin LI

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7507/1002-0179.201710007

2018-01-01

Abstract:Objective To systematically review the cost-effectiveness of gefitinib for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC),in order to provide the economics values of gefitinib for clinical application.Method We electronically searched databases including PubMed,Ovid,Embase,Cochrane Library,Medline,China National Knowledge Internet,VIP,and Wanfang database for articles about the cost-effectiveness of gefitinib for advanced NSCLC patients from January 1946 to October 2017,and then performed a systematic literature review of economic evaluations of geftinib.Results A total of 20 independent studies were included in the present systematic review,in which 8 were the first-line treatment,9 were the second-line treatment,1 was the third-line treatment,and 2 were maintenance treatment.The most common comparison was gefitinib vs.chemotherapy (n=7),and other comparisons were gefitinib vs.erlotinib (n=4),gefitinib vs.docetaxel (n=3),gefitinib vs.placebo (n=2),gefitinib vs.icotinib (n=2) gefitinib vs.afatinib (n=1) and gefitinib vs.other treatments (n=1).For the advanced NSCLC patients,the first-or second-line treatment with gefitinib compared to chemotherapy was considered to be more cost-effective,especially in patients with mutated epidermal growth factor receptor gene.As the second-line treatment,gefitinib was considered to be more economical than erlotinib and docetaxel.Conclusion Gefitinib is considered to be a cost-effective strategy for the advanced NSCLC patients as the first-or second-line therapy.
Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line treatments for advanced epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small cell lung cancer patients

Wen-Qian Li,Ling-Yu Li,Jin Chai,Jiu-Wei Cui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3733

IF: 4.711

2021-01-01

Cancer Medicine

Abstract:Objectives Recent studies showed prolonged survival for advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with both monotherapies and combined therapies. However, high costs limit clinical applications. Thus, we conducted this cost-effectiveness analysis to explore an optimal first-line treatment for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients. Materials and Methods Survival data were extracted from six clinical trials, including ARCHER1050 (dacomitinib vs. gefitinib); FLAURA (osimertinib vs. gefitinib/erlotinib); JO25567 and NEJ026 (bevacizumab +erlotinib vs. erlotinib); NEJ009 (gefitinib +chemotherapy vs. gefitinib); and NCT02148380 (gefitinib +chemotherapy vs. gefitinib vs. chemotherapy) trials. Cost-related data were obtained from hospitals and published literature. The effect parameter (quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) was the reflection of both survival and utility. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER), and net benefit were calculated, and the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at $30828/QALY from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Sensitivity analysis was performed to explore the stability of results. Results We compared treatment groups with control groups in each trial. ICERs were $1897750.74/QALY (ARCHER1050), $416560.02/QALY (FLAURA), -$477607.48/QALY (JO25567), -$464326.66/QALY (NEJ026), -$277121.22/QALY (NEJ009), -$399360.94/QALY (gefitinib as comparison, NCT02148380), and -$170733.05/QALY (chemotherapy as comparison, NCT02148380). Moreover, ACER and net benefit showed that the combination of EGFR-TKI with chemotherapy and osimertinib was of more economic benefit following first-generation EGFR-TKIs. Sensitivity analyses showed that the impact of utilities and monotherapy could be cost-effective with a 50% cost reduction. Conclusion First-generation EGFR-TKI therapy remained the most cost-effective treatment option for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients. Our results could serve as both a reference for both clinical practice and the formulation of medical insurance reimbursement.
Cost-effectiveness of Gefitinib, Icotinib, and Pemetrexed-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatments for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China

Shun Lu,Ming Ye,Lieming Ding,Fenlai Tan,Jie Fu,Bin Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.14310

2016-01-01

Oncotarget

Abstract:Tyrosine kinase inhibitors of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) are becoming the standard treatment option for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring an EGFR mutation, but the economic impact of this practice is unclear, especially in a health resource-limited setting. A decision-analytic model was developed to simulate 21-day patient transitions in a 10-year time horizon. The health and economic outcomes of four first-line strategies (pemetrexed plus cisplatin [PC] alone, PC followed by maintenance with pemetrexed, or initial treatment with gefitinib or icotinib) among patients harboring EGFR mutations were estimated and assessed via indirect comparisons. Costs in the Chinese setting were estimated. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity analyses were performed. The icotinib strategy resulted in greater health benefits than the other three strategies in NSCLC patients harboring EGFR mutations. Relative to PC alone, PC followed by pemetrexed maintenance, gefitinib and icotinib resulted in ICERs of $104,657, $28,485 and $19,809 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. The cost of pemetrexed, the EGFR mutation prevalence and the utility of progression-free survival were factors that had a considerable impact on the model outcomes. When the icotinib Patient Assistance Program was available, the economic outcome of icotinib was more favorable. These results indicate that gene-guided therapy with icotinib might be a more cost-effective treatment option than traditional chemotherapy.
A Trial-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of Erlotinib Alone Versus Platinum-Based Doublet Chemotherapy As First-Line Therapy For Eastern Asian Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Siying Wang,Liubao Peng,Jianhe Li,Xiaohui Zeng,Lihui Ouyang,Chongqing Tan,Qiong Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055917

IF: 3.7

2013-01-01

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Introduction: Lung cancer, the most prevalent malignant cancer in the world, remains a serious threat to public health. Recently, a large number of studies have shown that an epidermoid growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR TKI), Erlotinib, has significantly better efficacy and is better tolerated in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with a positive EGFR gene mutation. However, access to this drug is severely limited in China due to its high acquisition cost. Therefore, we decided to conduct a study to compare cost-effectiveness between erlotinib monotherapy and carboplatin-gemcitabine (CG) combination therapy in patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC.Methods: A Markov model was developed from the perspective of the Chinese health care system to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the two treatment strategies; this model was based on data from the OPTIMAL trial, which was undertaken at 22 centres in China. The 10-year quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), direct costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were estimated. To allow for uncertainties within the parameters and to estimate the model robustness, one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed.Results: The median progression-free survival (PFS) obtained from Markov model was 13.2 months (13.1 months was reported in the trial) in the erlotinib group while and 4.64 months (4.6 months was reported in the trial) in the CG group. The QALYs were 1.4 years in the erlotinib group and 1.96 years in the CG group, indicating difference of 0.56 years. The ICER was most sensitive to the health utility of DP ranged from $58,584.57 to $336,404.2. At a threshold of $96,884, erlotinib had a 50% probability of being cost-effective.Conclusions: Erlotinib monotherapy is more cost-effective compared with platinum-based doublets chemotherapy as a first-line therapy for advanced EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients from within the Chinese health care system.
Modelled Economic Analysis for Dacomitinib–A Cost Effectiveness Analysis in Treating Patients With EGFR-Mutation-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China

Yong-feng Yu,Luan Luan,Fan-fan Zhu,Peng Dong,Li-Heng Ma,Lan-ting Li,Lan Gao,Shun Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.564234

IF: 4.7

2021-12-14

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:Objectives To establish the cost-effectiveness of dacomitinib compared to gefitinib from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. Patients Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. Methods Partitioned survival analysis was undertaken to examine the cost-effectiveness of dacomitinib utilising individual patient data (IPD) from the pivotal randomised controlled trial (RCT) (ARCHER 1050). The three health states modelled were progression-free, post-progression, and death. Parametric survival distributions were fitted to IPD against the Kaplan-Meier survival curves corresponding to progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes by randomised groups. Costs included drug acquisition and administration, outpatient management (outpatient consultation and examinations), and best supportive care costs. Utility weights were sourced from the pivotal trial and other published literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated with costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) discounted at an annual rate of 5%. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken. Results In the base case, dacomitinib (CNY 265,512 and 1.95 QALY) was associated with higher costs and QALY gains compared to gefitinib (CNY 247,048 and 1.61 QALYs), resulting in an ICER of CNY 58,947/QALY. Using the empirical WTP/QALY threshold, dacomitinib is a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with EGFR-mutation-positive advanced NSCLC. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that dacomitinib had a 97% probability of being cost-effective. Conclusions Dacomitinib is a cost-effective treatment strategy in treating patients with EGFR-mutation-positive NSCLC from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. The uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness of dacomitinib could be reduced if long-term survival data become available. Clinical Trial Registration NCT01024413

oncology
Cost-utility of afatinib and gefitinib as first-line treatment for EGFR-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Hao Wang,Chenxin Zeng,Xin Li,Youjie Wang,Xinyi Li,Weihong Ge

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2018-0692

2019-01-01

Future Oncology

Abstract:Aim: To evaluate the cost-utility of gefitinib and afatinib as first-line EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer treatments from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. Materials & methods: A Markov model was established, state transition probabilities were extracted from the LUX-Lung7 trial and utility values were from previous studies. The cost was extracted from local charge or relevant literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for intention-to-treat, EGFR exon 19 deletion (del19) and exon Leu858Arg (21L858R, L858R) muation subgroups. Results: For the entire population, the afatinib regimen afforded additional 0.29 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were US$9820.41/QALY, US$18,529.65/QALY and US$1585.51/QALY for intention-to-treat, L858R and del19, respectively. Conclusion: First-line afatinib was more cost-effective than gefitinib for EFGR-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in China.
Egfr Mutations and the Correlation with Gefitinib Therapy in Chinese Nsclc - A Systematic Review Based on Individual Patient Data from 5 Medical Centers in China.

Y. Wu,W. Zhong,L. Li,L. Zhang,C. Zhou,W. Liu,J. Lin,Q. Zhou,C. Xu,G. Zhang,T. Mok

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.7187

IF: 45.3

2006-01-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:7187 Background: EGFR mutations were found to have a significant association with response to gefitinib. To date, information on status of EGFR mutation in Chinese remains scanty. Comprehensive review of existing information on EGFR mutations is essential for treatment selection in Chinese patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: We published 4 abstracts on EGFR mutation in Chinese patients at the 41st ASCO. We performed an IPD-meta-analysis on the data from the above investigators plus another one. The original individual EGFR mutations (exon 18,19,21) data was collected. Gefitinib was given with 250 mg/d until disease progression. Results: Total 407 cases were into the IPD review. The patient characteristic was male: female = 258:149; adenocarcinoma: other = 259:148; smoker: nonsmoker =178:153. The EGFR mutation rate was 3.05% (124/407). For adeno subgroup the EGFR mutation rate was 42.5% (110/259), non- adeno was 9.5% (14/148). In female the EGFR mutation rate was 41.6% (62/149), male was 24.0% (62/258). Non-smoker was 39.2% (60/153), smoker was 18.5% (33/178). In univariate analysis adeno, smoking, gender was significant predictive factors for EGFR mutation but in logistic regression only adeno is independent correlation factor (p = 0.000, 95% CI 2.078—9.001). Conclusions: The EGFR mutation is more common in no-smoking female adeno patients with NSCLC. The EGFR mutation group has a tendency of response rate to gefitinib compare to the EGFR wild group in NSCLC patients. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
Critical Appraisal of the Role of Gefitinib in the Management of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Ying Yuan,Xiaofen Li,Jiaqi Chen,Caixia Dong,Shan‐Shan Weng,Jianjin Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/ott.s34124

IF: 4

2014-01-01

OncoTargets and Therapy

Abstract:Past studies have demonstrated that epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors can significantly improve clinical outcomes in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and sensitive EGFR gene mutations. Gefitinib (Iressa(®)), the first oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been shown to be more effective and better tolerated than chemotherapy either in first-line or second-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC harboring sensitive EGFR mutations. Conversely, among patients with wild-type EGFR, gefitinib is inferior to standard chemotherapy in both the first-line and second-line settings. Further, gefitinib is effective in patients with brain metastases because of its low molecular weight and excellent penetration of the blood-brain barrier. In this review, we summarize the current data from clinical trials with gefitinib and appraise its role in the management of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.
Gene-guided Gefitinib Switch Maintenance Therapy for Patients with Advanced EGFR Mutation-Positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: an Economic Analysis

Jun Zhu,Te Li,Xiaohui Wang,Ming Ye,Jian Cai,Yuejuan Xu,Bin Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-13-39

IF: 4.638

2013-01-01

BMC Cancer

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Maintenance therapy with gefitinib notably improves survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and EGFR mutation-positive tumors, but the economic impact of this practice is unclear.METHODS:A decision-analytic model was developed to simulate 21-day patient transitions in a 10-year time horizon. The clinical data were primarily obtained from the results of a pivotal phase III trial that assessed gefitinib maintenance treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC. The cost data were derived from the perspective of the Chinese health care system. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 3 times the per capita GDP of China. Sensitivity analyses were used to explore the impact of uncertainty regarding the results. The impact of the gefitinib patient assistance program (GPAP) was evaluated.RESULTS:After EGFR genotyping, gefitinib maintenance treatment for advanced NSCLC with EGFR mutations increased the life expectancy by 0.74 years and 0.46 QALYs compared with routine follow-up at an additional cost of $26,149.90 USD ($7,178.20 with the GPAP). The ICER for gefitinib maintenance was $57,066.40 and $15,664.80 per QALY gained (at a 3% discount rate) without and with the GPAP, respectively. The utility of progression free survival, the hazard ratio of progression-free survival for gefitinib treatment and the cost of gefitinib per dose were the three factors that had the greatest influence on the results.CONCLUSIONS:These results indicate that gene-guided maintenance therapy with gefitinib with the GPAP might be a cost-effective treatment option.
OPTIMAL and ENSURE Trials-Based Combined Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Erlotinib Versus Chemotherapy for the First-Line Treatment of Asian Patients with Non-Squamous Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer.

Feng Wen,Hanrui Zheng,Pengfei Zhang,David Hutton,Qiu Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.08.274

IF: 3.006

2018-01-01

BMJ Open

Abstract:OBJECTIVES:Erlotinib, the first generation of epidermoid growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI), has been recommended as an essential treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutation. Although it has improved progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) was limited and erlotinib can be expensive. This cost-effectiveness analysis compares erlotinib monotherapy with gemcitabine-included doublet chemotherapy.SETTING:First-line treatment of Asian patients with NSCLC with EGFR mutation.METHODS:A Markov model was created based on the results of the ENSURE (NCT01342965) and OPTIMAL (CTONG-0802) trials which evaluated erlotinib and chemotherapy. The model simulates cancer progression and all causes of death. All medical costs were calculated from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcomes are costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).RESULTS:The combined PFS was 11.81 months and 5.1 months for erlotinib and chemotherapy, respectively, while the OS was reversed at 24.68 months for erlotinib and 26.16 months for chemotherapy. The chemotherapy arm gained 0.13 QALYs compared with erlotinib monotherapy (1.17 QALYs vs 1.04 QALYs), while erlotinib had lower costs ($55 230 vs $77 669), resulting in an ICER of $174 808 per QALY for the chemotherapy arm, which exceeds three times the Chinese GDP per capita. The most influential factors were the health utility of PFS, the cost of erlotinib and the health utility of progressed disease.CONCLUSION:Erlotinib monotherapy may be acceptable as a cost-effective first-line treatment for NSCLC compared with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. The results were robust to changes in assumptions.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01342965 and CTONG-0802.
Chemotherapy with or Without Gefitinib in Patients with Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of 6844 Patients

Zhou Hang,Zeng Chao,Wang Li-yang,Xie Hua,Zhou Jin,Diao Peng,Yao Wen-xiu,Zhao Xin,Wei Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20122920

IF: 6.133

2013-01-01

Chinese Medical Journal

Abstract:Background Gefitinib is widely used in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), in whom chemotherapy had failed. Previous trials reported inconsistent findings regarding the efficacy of gefitinib on overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). This study was to evaluate the effects of chemotherapy plus gefitinib versus chemotherapy alone on survival of patients with NSCLC. Methods We systematically searched Medline, EmBase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists of articles, and proceedings of major meetings for relevant literature. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chemotherapy with and without gefitinib in the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC were included in our analysis. The primary endpoints were OS and PFS. Results Of 182 relevant studies, 12 were included in the final analysis, which consisted of 6844 patients with NSCLC. Overall, we noted that gefitinib therapy had an 8% improvement in the OS as compared to the gefitinib-free therapy, but this difference was not statistically significant (HR, 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85-1.00; P=0.051). Furthermore, gefitinib therapy had significantly longer PFS compared to gefitinib-free therapy (HR, 0.72; 95% CI 0.60-0.87, P=0.001). Patients receiving gefitinib therapy also had a more frequent objective response rate (ORR) than the control arm (OR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.67-3.78, P <0.001). Rashes, diarrhea, dry skin, pruritus, paronychia, and abnormal hepatic function were more frequent in the gefitinib therapy group. Conclusions Treatment with gefitinib had a clear effect on PFS and ORR, and it might contribute considerably to the OS. Furthermore, there was some evidence of benefit for gefitinib therapy among patients with adenocarcinoma.
Comparison of Cost-Effectiveness Between Egfr-Tkis Therapy and Chemotherapy for Advanced Nsclc

T. Zhang,S. Cai,C. Wu,J. Xu,T. Lin,J. Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.08.266

IF: 5.156

2016-01-01

Value in Health

Abstract:To speculate the cumulated ICER of EGFR-TKIs treatments in ten years for advanced NSCLC patients with different EGFR gene mutation status and assist the government to make decision on drug reimbursement in order to achieve the optimal value of the limited healthcare resource. TreeAge Pro 2011 was used and one month was set as a stage. A total of 120 stages were circulated to evaluate the 10-year cost and effectiveness. According to roll back analysis, the total cost for chemotherapy was $28273 with the prolongation of 15.814 month in cumulated 10 years, and $37405 with the prolongation of 17.102 months for EGFR-TKIs. The ICER was $1304.72/LGM (life-gained month) through Markov cohort analysis and $1297.38/LGM through Monte Carlo analysis. Neither of the ICER values exceeded the predefined WTP (three times of GDP per capita per month). According to the probability sensitivity analysis, there was a probability of 87.1% for EGFR-TKIs being more cost-effective than chemotherapy. For cities or provinces with a GDP per capita per month more than $378.75, there was a probability of more than 50% for EFR-TKIs being more cost-effective. Chengdu, the city from which our clinical data came, gained GDP per capita per month in 2014 of $942.83, Therefore, its WTP would raise to $2862.5 (three times of $942.83) which largely exceeds the ICER either speculated by Markov cohort ($1304.72/LGM) or by Monte Carlo analysis ($1297.38/LGM). As WTP was predefined as three times of GDP per capita per month,EGFR-TKIs showed a probability of 87.1% being more cost-effective than chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients with mutated EGFR gene under the continuing fund support from China Charity Federation. Taking the example of Chengdu, EGFR-TKIs was 99% probably superior to chemotherapy in cost-effectiveness for NSCLC patients with mutated EGFR gene.
Economic outcomes of maintenance gefitinib for locally advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer with unknown EGFR mutations: a semi-Markov model analysis.

Xiaohui Zeng,Jianhe Li,Liubao Peng,Yunhua Wang,Chongqing Tan,Gannong Chen,Xiaomin Wan,Qiong Lu,Lidan Yi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0088881

IF: 3.7

2014-01-01

PLoS ONE

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Maintenance gefitinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in patients from eastern Asian with locally advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after four chemotherapeutic cycles (21 days per cycle) of first-line platinum-based combination chemotherapy without disease progression. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of maintenance gefitinib therapy after four chemotherapeutic cycle's stand first-line platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with unknown EGFR mutations, from a Chinese health care system perspective. METHODS AND FINDINGS:A semi-Markov model was designed to evaluate cost-effectiveness of the maintenance gefitinib treatment. Two-parametric Weibull and Log-logistic distribution were fitted to PFS and overall survival curves independently. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the stability of the model designed. The model base-case analysis suggested that maintenance gefitinib would increase benefits in a 1, 3, 6 or 10-year time horizon, with incremental $184,829, $19,214, $19,328, and $21,308 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, respectively. The most sensitive influential variable in the cost-effectiveness analysis was utility of PFS plus rash, followed by utility of PFS plus diarrhoea, utility of progressed disease, price of gefitinib, cost of follow-up treatment in progressed survival state, and utility of PFS on oral therapy. The price of gefitinib is the most significant parameter that could reduce the incremental cost per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that the cost-effective probability of maintenance gefitinib was zero under the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $16,349 (3 × per-capita gross domestic product of China). The sensitivity analyses all suggested that the model was robust. CONCLUSIONS:Maintenance gefitinib following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC with unknown EGFR mutations is not cost-effective. Decreasing the price of gefitinib may be a preferential choice for meeting widely treatment demands in China.
Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant icotinib versus chemotherapy for patients with stage II-IIIA EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer in China

Mu,L.,Liu,F.,Fang,Y.,He,M.,Yang,M.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081270

IF: 3.006

2024-08-25

BMJ Open

Abstract:Objective Icotinib has been approved for adjuvant treatment of stage II–IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in China, yet the long-term costs and outcomes of this strategy are unknown. Thus, we examined the cost effectiveness of adjuvant icotinib, compared with adjuvant chemotherapy, for the treatment of resected stage II–IIIA EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Design We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, comparing 2-year adjuvant icotinib with four cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using a Markov model. Model inputs were obtained from local data and literature. The influence of model parameters and assumptions was explored in sensitivity analyses. All costs are expressed in 2022 US dollars, and costs and QALYs were discounted at a rate of 5% per year. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at three times the per capita gross domestic product. Setting The Chinese healthcare system perspective. Participants A hypothetical Chinese cohort of patients with resected stage II–IIIA EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Interventions Icotinib versus chemotherapy. Primary outcome measure Costs, QALYs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results The incremental cost per QALY gained with the use of 2-year icotinib, from the Chinese healthcare system perspective, was 40 500, adjuvant icotinib was the optimal treatment in over 99% of replications. The interpretation of the results was insensitive to model and input assumptions. Conclusions Compared with adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant icotinib may be a cost-effective treatment for resected stage II–IIIA EGFR-mutated NSCLC as the WTP threshold is set at $40 500 per QALY.

medicine, general & internal
Cost-effectiveness analysis of dacomitinib versus gefitinib in first line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation

HONG Wang-long,XIA Yi-miao,SU Guang-quan,ZHANG Xu-dong,FANG Ping-ping,ZHU Wen-tao,ZHENG Miao-miao,MA Guo-qiang,SHEN Ai-zong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13286/j.1001-5213.2023.08.16

2023-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE From the perspective of China’s health system, in the context of the implementation of National Reimbursement Drug List（NRDL）,to evaluate the economics of dacomitinib versus gefitinib in first-line treatment of EGFR-mutated NSCLC.METHODS A Markov model was constructed based on the data of a phase III clinical trial.The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio（ICER）was used to evaluate the economics of dacotinib versus gefitinib, and the sensitivity analysis was performed.RESULTS The model running results show that compared with gefitinib, the ICER of dacomitinib is 129 763.86 CNY/QALY,which is less than 3 times China’s GDP per capita, and dacomitinib is cost-effectiveness.Sensitivity analysis results showed that the utility PFS states and the price of dacomitinib had the greatest impact on the results, when the WTP was 3 times per capita GDP of China, the probability of dacomitinib being cost-effectiveness was 83.04%.CONCLUSION Dacomitinib is a cost-effectiveness treatment over gefitinib in the first-line treatment of EGFR-mutant NSCLC after being added to the NRDL.
Model-Based Economic Evaluation of Ceritinib and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatments for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China

Ye Peng,Fang Ma,Chongqing Tan,Xiaomin Wan,Lidan Yi,Liubao Peng,Xiaohui Zeng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01103-4

2019-01-01

Advances in Therapy

Abstract:INTRODUCTION:A trial-based assessment was completed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ceritinib as a first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with rearrangement of anaplastic lymphoma kinase.METHODS:Based on the disease situation of advanced NSCLC, a Markov model was constructed to estimate the costs and benefits of ceritinib and platinum-based chemotherapy. The cost information and health utilities were obtained from published literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated. The stability of the model was verified by sensitivity analyses.RESULTS:The base case analysis results indicated that compared with platinum-based chemotherapy, ceritinib therapy would increase benefits in a 5-, 10- and 15-year time horizon, with extra costs of $230,661.61, $149,321.52 and $136,414.43 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. The most sensitive parameter in the model analysis was the cost of ceritinib. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that at the current price of ceritinib, the chance of ceritinib being cost-effective was 0 at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $27,142.85 per quality-adjusted life-year (three times the per capita gross domestic product of China).CONCLUSION:As a first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC with rearrangement of anaplastic lymphoma kinase, ceritinib is unlikely to be cost-effective at the current price from the Chinese healthcare perspective. To meet the treatment demands of patients, it may be a better option to reduce the price or provide appropriate drug assistance policies.

Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Gefitinib Plus Chemotherapy Versus Gefitinib Alone for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with EGFR Mutations in China

[The Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gefitinib or Erlotinib in the Treatment of Advanced EGFR Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients].

Comprehensive Comparison Between Adjuvant Targeted Therapy and Chemotherapy for EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Patients: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of EGFR Mutation Testing and Afatinib Versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin As First-Line Therapy for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in China

Cost-effectiveness of Afatinib, Gefitinib, Erlotinib and Pemetrexed-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatments for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China.

A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of gefitinib for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line treatments for advanced epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small cell lung cancer patients

Cost-effectiveness of Gefitinib, Icotinib, and Pemetrexed-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatments for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China

A Trial-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of Erlotinib Alone Versus Platinum-Based Doublet Chemotherapy As First-Line Therapy For Eastern Asian Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Modelled Economic Analysis for Dacomitinib–A Cost Effectiveness Analysis in Treating Patients With EGFR-Mutation-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China

Cost-utility of afatinib and gefitinib as first-line treatment for EGFR-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Egfr Mutations and the Correlation with Gefitinib Therapy in Chinese Nsclc - A Systematic Review Based on Individual Patient Data from 5 Medical Centers in China.

Critical Appraisal of the Role of Gefitinib in the Management of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Gene-guided Gefitinib Switch Maintenance Therapy for Patients with Advanced EGFR Mutation-Positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: an Economic Analysis

OPTIMAL and ENSURE Trials-Based Combined Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Erlotinib Versus Chemotherapy for the First-Line Treatment of Asian Patients with Non-Squamous Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer.

Chemotherapy with or Without Gefitinib in Patients with Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of 6844 Patients

Comparison of Cost-Effectiveness Between Egfr-Tkis Therapy and Chemotherapy for Advanced Nsclc

Economic outcomes of maintenance gefitinib for locally advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer with unknown EGFR mutations: a semi-Markov model analysis.

Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant icotinib versus chemotherapy for patients with stage II-IIIA EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer in China

Cost-effectiveness analysis of dacomitinib versus gefitinib in first line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation

Model-Based Economic Evaluation of Ceritinib and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatments for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China