Cargando…

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of combination treatment with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared to treatment with gemcitabine alone for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) in Japan. METHODS: A monthly transmitted Markov model of three states was constructed based on the Japan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tsukiyama, Ikuto, Ejiri, Masayuki, Yamamoto, Yoshihiro, Nakao, Haruhisa, Yoneda, Masashi, Matsuura, Katsuhiko, Arakawa, Ichiro, Saito, Hiroko, Inoue, Tadao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5660135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27785685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12029-016-9885-6
_version_ 1783274237494034432
author Tsukiyama, Ikuto
Ejiri, Masayuki
Yamamoto, Yoshihiro
Nakao, Haruhisa
Yoneda, Masashi
Matsuura, Katsuhiko
Arakawa, Ichiro
Saito, Hiroko
Inoue, Tadao
author_facet Tsukiyama, Ikuto
Ejiri, Masayuki
Yamamoto, Yoshihiro
Nakao, Haruhisa
Yoneda, Masashi
Matsuura, Katsuhiko
Arakawa, Ichiro
Saito, Hiroko
Inoue, Tadao
author_sort Tsukiyama, Ikuto
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of combination treatment with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared to treatment with gemcitabine alone for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) in Japan. METHODS: A monthly transmitted Markov model of three states was constructed based on the Japan BT-22 trial. Transition probabilities among the health states were derived from a trial conducted in Japan and converted to appropriate parameters for our model. The associated cost components, obtained from a receipt-based survey undertaken at the Aichi Medical University Hospital, were those related to inpatient care, outpatient care, and treatment for BTC. Costs for palliative care and treatment of adverse events were obtained from the National Health Insurance price list. We estimated cost-effectiveness per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) at a time horizon of 36 months. An annual discount of 3 % for both cost and outcome was considered. RESULTS: The base case outcomes indicated that combination therapy was less cost-effective than monotherapy when the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was approximately 14 million yen per QALY gained. The deterministic sensitivity analysis of the ICER revealed that the ICER of the base case was robust. A probabilistic analysis conducted with 10,000-time Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated efficacy at the willingness to pay threshold of 6 million yen per QALY gained for approximately 33 % of the population. CONCLUSION: In Japan, combination therapy is less cost-effective than monotherapy for treating advanced BTC, regardless of the statistical significance of the two therapies. Useful information on the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy is much needed for the treatment of advanced BTC in Japan.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5660135
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56601352017-11-03 A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan Tsukiyama, Ikuto Ejiri, Masayuki Yamamoto, Yoshihiro Nakao, Haruhisa Yoneda, Masashi Matsuura, Katsuhiko Arakawa, Ichiro Saito, Hiroko Inoue, Tadao J Gastrointest Cancer Original Research OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of combination treatment with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared to treatment with gemcitabine alone for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) in Japan. METHODS: A monthly transmitted Markov model of three states was constructed based on the Japan BT-22 trial. Transition probabilities among the health states were derived from a trial conducted in Japan and converted to appropriate parameters for our model. The associated cost components, obtained from a receipt-based survey undertaken at the Aichi Medical University Hospital, were those related to inpatient care, outpatient care, and treatment for BTC. Costs for palliative care and treatment of adverse events were obtained from the National Health Insurance price list. We estimated cost-effectiveness per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) at a time horizon of 36 months. An annual discount of 3 % for both cost and outcome was considered. RESULTS: The base case outcomes indicated that combination therapy was less cost-effective than monotherapy when the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was approximately 14 million yen per QALY gained. The deterministic sensitivity analysis of the ICER revealed that the ICER of the base case was robust. A probabilistic analysis conducted with 10,000-time Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated efficacy at the willingness to pay threshold of 6 million yen per QALY gained for approximately 33 % of the population. CONCLUSION: In Japan, combination therapy is less cost-effective than monotherapy for treating advanced BTC, regardless of the statistical significance of the two therapies. Useful information on the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy is much needed for the treatment of advanced BTC in Japan. Springer US 2016-10-26 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5660135/ /pubmed/27785685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12029-016-9885-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open Access This 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.
spellingShingle Original Research
Tsukiyama, Ikuto
Ejiri, Masayuki
Yamamoto, Yoshihiro
Nakao, Haruhisa
Yoneda, Masashi
Matsuura, Katsuhiko
Arakawa, Ichiro
Saito, Hiroko
Inoue, Tadao
A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan
title A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan
title_full A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan
title_fullStr A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan
title_full_unstemmed A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan
title_short A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan
title_sort cost-effectiveness analysis of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine alone for treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer in japan
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5660135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27785685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12029-016-9885-6
work_keys_str_mv AT tsukiyamaikuto acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT ejirimasayuki acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT yamamotoyoshihiro acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT nakaoharuhisa acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT yonedamasashi acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT matsuurakatsuhiko acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT arakawaichiro acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT saitohiroko acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT inouetadao acosteffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT tsukiyamaikuto costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT ejirimasayuki costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT yamamotoyoshihiro costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT nakaoharuhisa costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT yonedamasashi costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT matsuurakatsuhiko costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT arakawaichiro costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT saitohiroko costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan
AT inouetadao costeffectivenessanalysisofgemcitabinepluscisplatinversusgemcitabinealonefortreatmentofadvancedbiliarytractcancerinjapan