RESUMEN
The analysis was conducted to assess the pharmacological costs of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil in the treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Pivotal phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil in the treatment of refractory mCRC were considered. We have also considered the ReDOS trial, in order to verify if the dose-escalation strategy (practice changing for regorafenib) could influences the results. Differences in OS (expressed in months) between the different arms were calculated and compared with the pharmacological costs (at the Pharmacy of our Hospital and expressed in euros ()) needed to get one month of OS. Trifluridine/tipiracil resulted the less expensive, with 1167.50 per month OS-gained. The ReDOS trial further reduce costs with 510.41 per month OS-gained in favour of regorafenib with the escalation-dose strategy. Both regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil can be considered economically sustainable treatments for refractory mCRC, apparently with a lower cost of trifluridine/tipiracil. The adoption of a dose-escalation strategy (ReDOS trial) could reverse the situation making regorafenib more cost-effective than trifluridine/tipiracil.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio/métodos , Costos de los Medicamentos/tendencias , Compuestos de Fenilurea/economía , Piridinas/economía , Pirrolidinas/economía , Timina/economía , Trifluridina/economía , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economía , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Combinación de Medicamentos , Humanos , Compuestos de Fenilurea/administración & dosificación , Piridinas/administración & dosificación , Pirrolidinas/administración & dosificación , Timina/administración & dosificación , Trifluridina/administración & dosificaciónAsunto(s)
Pirrolidinas/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Timina/administración & dosificación , Trifluridina/administración & dosificación , Combinación de Medicamentos , Costos de los Medicamentos , Humanos , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Pirrolidinas/economía , Neoplasias Gástricas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Gástricas/patología , Timina/economía , Trifluridina/economíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the cost utility of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) compared with that of best supportive care (BSC) in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with, or not considered candidates for, available therapies, including fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based chemotherapies; anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents; and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents, in Japan. METHODS: Efficacy data, utility values, and costs were extracted from published studies. The cost and effectiveness of regorafenib and of T/T were compared with those of BSC and examined between the 2 agents over a 5-year time horizon using a partitioned survival analysis. The health outcomes were life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. The costs were year-2018 revisions to the drug prices and medical fees. The uncertainty and robustness of the model were verified by 1-way sensitivity analysis, probability sensitivity analysis, and scenario analysis compared with different clinical studies. A 2% per-annum discount was applied to expenses and QALYs. The willingness-to-pay threshold used was 5 million Japanese yen (JPY). FINDINGS: Regorafenib and T/T had incremental costs of 11,898,982 JPY (107,781 US dollars [USD]) and 5,000,141 JPY (45,291 USD), incremental effects of 0.249 QALYs (0.280 LYs) and 0.344 QALYs (0.421 LYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of 47,773,791 JPY (432,734 USD) and 14,550,577 JPY (131,799 USD) per QALY, respectively. Results of sensitivity analyses all exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of 15 million JPY. In the comparison of the 2 agents, T/T was a dominant alternative over regorafenib. IMPLICATIONS: As a third-line or later treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Japan, T/T is cost-effective compared with BSC, whereas regorafenib is not. It is necessary to adjust the price of regorafenib based on the results of this analysis, with the improvement of clinical parameters such as survival time and adverse events.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/economía , Compuestos de Fenilurea/economía , Piridinas/economía , Pirrolidinas/economía , Timina/economía , Trifluridina/economía , Adulto , Neoplasias Colorrectales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Combinación de Medicamentos , Humanos , Japón , Compuestos de Fenilurea/uso terapéutico , Piridinas/uso terapéutico , Pirrolidinas/uso terapéutico , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Timina/uso terapéutico , Trifluridina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of trifluridine and tipiracil hydrochloride (FTD/TPI) compared with best supportive care (BSC) or regorafenib for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have been previously treated with or are not considered candidates for available therapies including fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapies, anti-VEGF agents and anti-EGFR agents in Greece. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was locally adapted from a third-party payer perspective over a 10 year time horizon. Efficacy data and utility values were extracted from published studies. Resource consumption data were obtained from local experts using a questionnaire developed for the purpose of the study and was combined with unit costs obtained from official sources. All costs reflect the year 2017 in euros. Primary outcomes were patients' life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per QALY and LYs gained. RESULTS: Total life time cost per patient for FTD/TPI, BSC and regorafenib was estimated to be 10,087, 1,879 and 10,850, respectively. In terms of health outcomes, FTD/TPI was associated with 0.25 and 0.11 increment in LYs compared with BSC and regorafenib, respectively. Furthermore, FTD/TPI was associated with 0.17, and 0.07 increment in QALYs compared with BSC and regorafenib, resulting in ICERs of 32,759 per LY gained and 49,326 per QALY gained versus BSC. Moreover, FTD/TPI was a dominant alternative over regorafenib. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that FTD/TPI may represent a cost-effective treatment option compared with other alternative therapies as a third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Greece.