Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is associated with low median overall survival. Combination chemotherapy regimens FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel (GemNab) are the new adjuvant treatment standards for resectable pancreatic cancer. PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials demonstrated superior clinica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kharat, Aditi A, Nelson, Richard, Au, Trang, Biskupiak, Joseph
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10391115/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34595948
http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.10.1367
_version_ 1785082629824970752
author Kharat, Aditi A
Nelson, Richard
Au, Trang
Biskupiak, Joseph
author_facet Kharat, Aditi A
Nelson, Richard
Au, Trang
Biskupiak, Joseph
author_sort Kharat, Aditi A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is associated with low median overall survival. Combination chemotherapy regimens FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel (GemNab) are the new adjuvant treatment standards for resectable pancreatic cancer. PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials demonstrated superior clinical outcomes with FOLFIRINOX and GemNab, each vs gemcitabine monotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FOLFIRINOX vs GemNab for resectable pancreatic cancer in adults from the U.S. payer perspective, in order to inform decision makers about which of these treatments is optimal. METHODS: A Markov model with 3 disease states (relapse free, progressive disease, and death) was developed. Cycle length was 1 month, and time horizon was 10 years. Transition probabilities were derived from PRODIGE-24 and APACT survival data. All cost and utility input parameters were obtained from published literature. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to obtain total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years (LYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A 3% annual discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. The effect of uncertainty on model parameters was assessed with 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). RESULTS: Our analysis estimated that the cost for FOLFIRINOX was $40,831 higher than GemNab ($99,669 vs. $58,837). Despite increased toxicity, FOLFIRINOX was associated with additional 0.18 QALYs and 0.25 LYs compared with GemNab (QALY: 1.65 vs. 1.47; LY: 2.09 vs. 1.84). The ICER for FOLFIRINOX vs GemNab was $226,841 per QALY and $163,325 per LY. FOLFIRINOX was not cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $200,000 per QALY, and this was confirmed by the PSA. CONCLUSIONS: Total monthly cost for FOLFIRINOX was approximately 1.7 times higher than GemNab. If the WTP threshold increases to or above $250,000 per QALY, FOLFIRINOX then becomes a cost-effective treatment option.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10391115
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103911152023-08-02 Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials Kharat, Aditi A Nelson, Richard Au, Trang Biskupiak, Joseph J Manag Care Spec Pharm Research BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is associated with low median overall survival. Combination chemotherapy regimens FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel (GemNab) are the new adjuvant treatment standards for resectable pancreatic cancer. PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials demonstrated superior clinical outcomes with FOLFIRINOX and GemNab, each vs gemcitabine monotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FOLFIRINOX vs GemNab for resectable pancreatic cancer in adults from the U.S. payer perspective, in order to inform decision makers about which of these treatments is optimal. METHODS: A Markov model with 3 disease states (relapse free, progressive disease, and death) was developed. Cycle length was 1 month, and time horizon was 10 years. Transition probabilities were derived from PRODIGE-24 and APACT survival data. All cost and utility input parameters were obtained from published literature. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to obtain total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years (LYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A 3% annual discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. The effect of uncertainty on model parameters was assessed with 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). RESULTS: Our analysis estimated that the cost for FOLFIRINOX was $40,831 higher than GemNab ($99,669 vs. $58,837). Despite increased toxicity, FOLFIRINOX was associated with additional 0.18 QALYs and 0.25 LYs compared with GemNab (QALY: 1.65 vs. 1.47; LY: 2.09 vs. 1.84). The ICER for FOLFIRINOX vs GemNab was $226,841 per QALY and $163,325 per LY. FOLFIRINOX was not cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $200,000 per QALY, and this was confirmed by the PSA. CONCLUSIONS: Total monthly cost for FOLFIRINOX was approximately 1.7 times higher than GemNab. If the WTP threshold increases to or above $250,000 per QALY, FOLFIRINOX then becomes a cost-effective treatment option. Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 2021-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10391115/ /pubmed/34595948 http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.10.1367 Text en Copyright © 2021, Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research
Kharat, Aditi A
Nelson, Richard
Au, Trang
Biskupiak, Joseph
Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials
title Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials
title_full Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials
title_short Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials
title_sort cost-effectiveness analysis of folfirinox vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the united states based on prodige-24 and apact trials
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10391115/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34595948
http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.10.1367
work_keys_str_mv AT kharataditia costeffectivenessanalysisoffolfirinoxvsgemcitabinewithnabpaclitaxelasadjuvanttreatmentforresectedpancreaticcancerintheunitedstatesbasedonprodige24andapacttrials
AT nelsonrichard costeffectivenessanalysisoffolfirinoxvsgemcitabinewithnabpaclitaxelasadjuvanttreatmentforresectedpancreaticcancerintheunitedstatesbasedonprodige24andapacttrials
AT autrang costeffectivenessanalysisoffolfirinoxvsgemcitabinewithnabpaclitaxelasadjuvanttreatmentforresectedpancreaticcancerintheunitedstatesbasedonprodige24andapacttrials
AT biskupiakjoseph costeffectivenessanalysisoffolfirinoxvsgemcitabinewithnabpaclitaxelasadjuvanttreatmentforresectedpancreaticcancerintheunitedstatesbasedonprodige24andapacttrials