RESUMO
Burkitt lymphoma is an aggressive B cell malignancy accounting for 1-2% of all adult lymphomas. Treatment with dose-intensive, multi-agent chemotherapy is effective but associated with considerable toxicity. In this observational study, we compared real-world efficacy, toxicity, and costs of four frequently employed treatment strategies for Burkitt lymphoma: the Lymphome Malins B (LMB), the Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster (BFM), the HOVON, and the CODOX-M/IVAC regimens. We collected data from 147 adult patients treated in eight referral centers. Following central pathology assessment, 105 of these cases were accepted as Burkitt lymphoma, resulting in the following treatment groups: LMB 36 patients, BFM 19 patients, HOVON 29 patients, and CODOX-M/IVAC 21 patients (median age 39 years, range 14-74; mean duration of follow-up 47 months). There was no significant difference between age, sex ratio, disease stage, or percentage HIV-positive patients between the treatment groups. Five-year progression-free survival (69%, p = 0.966) and 5-year overall survival (69%, p = 0.981) were comparable for all treatment groups. Treatment-related toxicity was also comparable with only hepatotoxicity seen more frequently in the CODOX/M-IVAC group (p = 0.004). Costs were determined by the number of rituximab gifts and the number of inpatients days. Overall, CODOX-M/IVAC had the most beneficial profile with regards to costs, treatment duration, and percentage of patients completing planned treatment. We conclude that the four treatment protocols for Burkitt lymphoma yield nearly identical results with regards to efficacy and safety but differ in treatment duration and costs. These differences may help guide future choice of treatment.
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Linfoma de Burkitt/tratamento farmacológico , Análise Custo-Benefício , Infecções por HIV/tratamento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Linfoma de Burkitt/complicações , Linfoma de Burkitt/economia , Linfoma de Burkitt/mortalidade , Carmustina/economia , Carmustina/uso terapêutico , Ciclofosfamida/economia , Ciclofosfamida/uso terapêutico , Citarabina/economia , Citarabina/uso terapêutico , Etoposídeo/economia , Etoposídeo/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Infecções por HIV/complicações , Infecções por HIV/economia , Infecções por HIV/mortalidade , Humanos , Ifosfamida/economia , Ifosfamida/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Melfalan/economia , Melfalan/uso terapêutico , Metotrexato/economia , Metotrexato/uso terapêutico , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Estudos Retrospectivos , Rituximab/economia , Rituximab/uso terapêutico , Análise de SobrevidaRESUMO
Grade IV glioma (glioblastoma) is one of the most common brain/central nervous system cancers. In 2005, the standard of care for adjuvant treatment was significantly changed with the approval of temozolomide. Carmustine wafers have also gained some popularity. Phase III trials are currently evaluating bevacizumab in conjunction with the standard temozolomide regimen. Despite these recent advances in pharmacotherapy, roughly two-thirds of patients do not survive longer than 2 years after diagnosis. Meanwhile, the costs of treatment are substantial. The goal of this study is to review the clinical, cost-of-illness, and cost-effectiveness literature relevant to treating glioblastoma. Estimates of the economic burden of glioblastoma within different healthcare systems were converted to 2013 US dollars. Temozolomide has demonstrated a 2.5-month increase in overall survival and a 1.9-month increase in progression-free survival, relative to radiotherapy alone. Carmustine wafers have also been shown to increase overall survival by 2.3 months, compared with placebo wafers. Cost-effectiveness studies of temozolomide have produced incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, adjusted to 2013 US dollars, with a range from US$73,586 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) (UK National Health Service perspective) to US$105,234 per QALY (US societal perspective). More research is needed to quantify the full societal burden of illness.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/economia , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Efeitos Psicossociais da Doença , Análise Custo-Benefício , Glioblastoma/tratamento farmacológico , Glioblastoma/economia , Carmustina/economia , Carmustina/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia Adjuvante/economia , Dacarbazina/análogos & derivados , Dacarbazina/economia , Dacarbazina/uso terapêutico , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Glioblastoma/radioterapia , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Humanos , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , TemozolomidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: High-grade gliomas are aggressive brain tumours that are extremely challenging to treat effectively. The intracranial implantation of carmustine wafers (BCNU-W), which delivers chemotherapy directly to the affected area, may prolong survival in this population. However, no attention has yet been paid to the economic implications of BCNU-W in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost effectiveness of BCNU-W as an adjunct to surgery followed by radiotherapy, compared with surgery plus radiotherapy alone. Newly diagnosed, operable grade III and IV gliomas in a population with a mean age of 55 years were considered. METHODS: A Markov cost-utility model was developed in Microsoft Excel, adopting a UK NHS perspective. Transition probabilities and cost data (year 2004 values) were obtained from published literature or expert opinion. The model incorporated utility values, obtained from members of the public, reflecting the quality of life associated with high-grade glioma. The effects of uncertainty were explored through extensive one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Surgery with the implantation of BCNU-W followed by radiotherapy costs pound sterling 54 500 per additional QALY gained when compared with surgery plus radiotherapy alone. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows a <10% probability that BCNU-W would be considered cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of pound sterling 30 000 per QALY. Although model outputs were sensitive to alterations in several key parameters, the incremental cost effectiveness of the intervention remained above pound sterling 30 000 per QALY in all analyses. CONCLUSION: Compared with usual care for the treatment of newly diagnosed high-grade gliomas, BCNU-W is unlikely to be considered a cost-effective use of healthcare resources when judged by the standards commonly adopted in England and Wales. However, the dreadful prognosis of the condition and the paucity of alternative therapies are additional issues that healthcare commissioners may choose to take into account when considering an adoption decision.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/tratamento farmacológico , Carmustina/uso terapêutico , Glioma/tratamento farmacológico , Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Antineoplásicos/economia , Neoplasias Encefálicas/patologia , Neoplasias Encefálicas/terapia , Carmustina/administração & dosagem , Carmustina/economia , Quimioterapia Adjuvante , Estudos de Coortes , Análise Custo-Benefício , Implantes de Medicamento , Glioma/patologia , Glioma/terapia , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Modelos Econométricos , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Qualidade de VidaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of adjuvant carmustine wafers (BCNU-W) and also of adjuvant and concomitant temozolomide (TMZ), compared with surgery with radiotherapy. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases were searched up to August 2005. REVIEW METHODS: Included trials were critically appraised for key elements of internal and external validity. Relevant data were extracted and a narrative synthesis of the evidence produced. Where possible, data on absolute survival at a fixed time point were meta-analysed using a random effects model. A Markov (state transition) model was developed to assess the cost-utility of the two interventions. The model compared BCNU-W or TMZ separately with current standard treatment with surgery and radiotherapy. The simulated cohort had a mean age of 55 years and was modelled over 5 years. RESULTS: Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 32, n = 240) and two observational studies of BCNU-W compared with placebo wafers as adjuvant therapy to surgery and radiotherapy for newly diagnosed high-grade glioma were identified. All the studies were in adults and provided data on 193 patients who had received BCNU-W. The RCT findings excluded under 65-year-olds and those with a Karnofsky Performance Status of less than 60. The largest multi-centre RCT suggested a possible survival advantage with BCNU-W among a cohort of patients with grade III and IV tumours, adding a median of 2.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.5 to 5.1]. However, analysis using per-protocol, unstratified methods shows this difference to be not statistically significant (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.03, p = 0.08). Long-term follow-up suggests a significant survival advantage using unstratified analysis. No difference in progression-free survival (PFS) was demonstrated. Subgroup analysis of those with grade IV tumours also showed no significant survival advantage with BCNU-W [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.11, p = 0.20, unstratified analysis]. It is estimated that the cost of surgery and radiotherapy, with follow-up, treatment of adverse effects and end of life care is around 17,000 pounds per patient. Treatment with BCNU-W adds an additional 6600 pounds. Across the modelled cohort of 1000 patients, use of BCNU-W costs an additional 6.6 million pounds and confers an additional 122 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). On average, that is 6600 pounds per patient for 0.122 QALYs (6.3 quality-adjusted life-weeks). The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is 54,500 pounds/QALY. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, BCNU-W was not cost-effective in 89% of the simulations assuming a willingness to pay threshold of 30,000 pounds/QALY. In 15% of simulations, BCNU-W was dominated (i.e. did more harm than good, conferring fewer QALYs at greater cost). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) suggests that it is very unlikely to be the most cost-effective option at normal levels of willingness to pay (11% probability at 30,000 pounds/QALY), only becoming likely to be the most cost-effective option at much higher levels of willingness to pay (50% probability at 55,000 pounds/QALY). Two RCTs (n = 130, n = 573) and two observational studies were included, giving evidence for 429 adult patients receiving TMZ. Currently, TMZ is licensed for use in those with newly diagnosed grade IV gliomas only. The RCTs excluded those with lower performance status and, in the larger RCT, those older than 70 years. TMZ provides a small but statistically significant median survival benefit of 2.5 months (95% CI 2.0 to 3.8), giving an HR of 0.63 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.75, p < 0.001). At 2 years, 26.5% of patients treated with TMZ were alive compared with 10.4% of those in the control arm. Median PFS is also enhanced with TMZ, giving a median 1.9 months' advantage (95% CI 1.4 to 2.7, p < 0.001). No analysis of the subgroup of patients with confirmed grade IV tumours was undertaken. Subgroup analysis of patients by O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) activity showed a significant treatment advantage for those with reduced MGMT activity but not for those with normal activity, although this analysis was based on a selected sample of patients and the test used has proved difficult to replicate. A median gain of 6.4 (95% CI 4.4 to 9.5) more life-months is seen with TMZ among those with reduced MGMT, giving an HR of 0.51 (p < 0.007). PFS is increased by a median of 4.4 months (95% CI 1.2 to 6.3), giving an HR of 0.48 (p = 0.001). The model shows a cost per patient for being treated with surgery, radiotherapy and including adverse effects of treatment and end of life care of around 17,000 pounds per patient. TMZ in the adjuvant and concomitant phase adds an additional cost of around 7800 pounds. Across the modelled cohort of 1000 patients, use of TMZ costs an additional 7.8 million pounds and confers an additional 217 QALYs. For the average patient this is 7800 pounds for an additional 0.217 QALYs (11 quality-adjusted life-weeks). The base-case ICER is 36,000 pounds/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses shows that TMZ was not cost-effective in 77% of the simulations. The CEAC suggests that there is a 23% chance that TMZ is the most cost-effective option at a willingness to pay level of 30,000 pounds/QALY, rising to be more cost-effective than no TMZ at slightly higher levels (50% probability at 35,000 pounds/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: BCNU-W has not been proven to confer a significant advantage in survival for patients with grade III tumours when treated with the drug, compared with placebo. There does not appear to be a survival advantage for patients with grade IV tumours. No increase in PFS has been shown. Limited evidence suggests a small but significant advantage in both overall survival and PFS with TMZ among a mixed population with grade IV and grade III (7-8%) tumours. However, it remains unclear whether this is true in grade IV tumours alone. On the basis of best available evidence, the authors consider that neither BCNU-W nor TMZ is likely to be considered cost-effective by NHS decision-makers. However, data for the model were drawn from limited evidence of variable quality. Tumour type is clearly important in assessing patient prognosis with different treatments. Grade IV tumours are commonest and appear to have least chance of response. There were too few grade III tumours included to carry out a formal assessment, but they appear to respond better and drive results for both drugs. Future use of genetic and biomarkers may help identify subtypes which will respond, but current licensing indications do not specify these. Further research is suggested into the effectiveness of these drugs, and also into areas such as genetic markers, chemotherapy regimens, patient and carer quality of life, and patient views on survival advantages vs treatment disadvantages.