Cargando…

Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database

BACKGROUND: A randomized clinical trial has found that the addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine (GEM-E) for pancreatic cancer led to a modest increase in survival. The aim of this national population-based retrospective study was to compare the effectiveness of GEM-E to GEM alone for pancreatic canc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shin, Sangjin, Park, Chan Mi, Kwon, Hanbyeol, Lee, Kyung-Hun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4940912/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27400734
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2482-z
_version_ 1782442219437817856
author Shin, Sangjin
Park, Chan Mi
Kwon, Hanbyeol
Lee, Kyung-Hun
author_facet Shin, Sangjin
Park, Chan Mi
Kwon, Hanbyeol
Lee, Kyung-Hun
author_sort Shin, Sangjin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A randomized clinical trial has found that the addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine (GEM-E) for pancreatic cancer led to a modest increase in survival. The aim of this national population-based retrospective study was to compare the effectiveness of GEM-E to GEM alone for pancreatic cancer patients in real clinical practice. METHODS: Patients with pancreatic cancer (ICD-10: C25) with prescription claims of gemcitabine or erlotinib between Jan 1, 2007 and Dec 31, 2012 were retrospectively identified from the Korean Health Insurance claims database. To be included in the study population, patients were required to have had a histological or cytological diagnosis within one year before chemotherapy. Patients treated with prior radiotherapy, surgery, or chemotherapy were excluded to reduce heterogeneity. Overall survival from the initiation of therapy and the medical costs of GEM-E and GEM were compared. RESULTS: A total of 4,267 patients were included in the analysis. Overall survival was not significantly longer in patients treated with GEM-E (median 6.77 months for GEM-E vs. 6.68 months for GEM, p = 0.0977). There was also no significant difference in the respective one-year survival rates (27.0 % vs. 27.3 %; p = 0.5988). Multivariate analysis using age, gender, and comorbidities as covariates did not reveal any significant differences in survival. Based on this relative effectiveness, the incremental cost per life year gained over GEM was estimated at USD 70,843.64 for GEM-E. CONCLUSIONS: GEM-E for pancreatic cancer is not more effective than GEM in a real-world setting, and it does not provide reasonable cost-effectiveness over GEM. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2482-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4940912
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49409122016-07-13 Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database Shin, Sangjin Park, Chan Mi Kwon, Hanbyeol Lee, Kyung-Hun BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: A randomized clinical trial has found that the addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine (GEM-E) for pancreatic cancer led to a modest increase in survival. The aim of this national population-based retrospective study was to compare the effectiveness of GEM-E to GEM alone for pancreatic cancer patients in real clinical practice. METHODS: Patients with pancreatic cancer (ICD-10: C25) with prescription claims of gemcitabine or erlotinib between Jan 1, 2007 and Dec 31, 2012 were retrospectively identified from the Korean Health Insurance claims database. To be included in the study population, patients were required to have had a histological or cytological diagnosis within one year before chemotherapy. Patients treated with prior radiotherapy, surgery, or chemotherapy were excluded to reduce heterogeneity. Overall survival from the initiation of therapy and the medical costs of GEM-E and GEM were compared. RESULTS: A total of 4,267 patients were included in the analysis. Overall survival was not significantly longer in patients treated with GEM-E (median 6.77 months for GEM-E vs. 6.68 months for GEM, p = 0.0977). There was also no significant difference in the respective one-year survival rates (27.0 % vs. 27.3 %; p = 0.5988). Multivariate analysis using age, gender, and comorbidities as covariates did not reveal any significant differences in survival. Based on this relative effectiveness, the incremental cost per life year gained over GEM was estimated at USD 70,843.64 for GEM-E. CONCLUSIONS: GEM-E for pancreatic cancer is not more effective than GEM in a real-world setting, and it does not provide reasonable cost-effectiveness over GEM. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2482-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4940912/ /pubmed/27400734 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2482-z Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Shin, Sangjin
Park, Chan Mi
Kwon, Hanbyeol
Lee, Kyung-Hun
Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database
title Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database
title_full Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database
title_fullStr Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database
title_full_unstemmed Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database
title_short Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database
title_sort erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of korean national database
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4940912/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27400734
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2482-z
work_keys_str_mv AT shinsangjin erlotinibplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineforpancreaticcancerrealworldanalysisofkoreannationaldatabase
AT parkchanmi erlotinibplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineforpancreaticcancerrealworldanalysisofkoreannationaldatabase
AT kwonhanbyeol erlotinibplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineforpancreaticcancerrealworldanalysisofkoreannationaldatabase
AT leekyunghun erlotinibplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineforpancreaticcancerrealworldanalysisofkoreannationaldatabase