Economic Burden of Toxicities Associated with Treating Metastatic Melanoma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Little has been reported on the costs of managing the adverse events (AEs) associated with current therapies for patients with regional or distant metastatic melanoma. OBJECTIVES: To identify treatment-related AEs in patients with metastatic melanoma and to estimate the associated costs of treating these AEs in the United States. METHODS: A cost-estimation study for AEs associated with treatment of metastatic melanoma was conducted from 2012 to 2013 by identifying grades 3 and 4 AEs through the use of a comprehensive search of drug labels and English-language, published phase 2/3 studies in PubMed, conference abstracts, and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Resource utilization for the management of each type of AE in the outpatient setting was obtained via interviews with 5 melanoma specialists in the United States. Unit costs for an AE associated with melanoma treatment in the outpatient setting were assigned using Medicare reimbursement rates to obtain these costs. Hospitalization and length-of-stay costs were estimated for each associated AE using the large national claims database Optum Clinformatics Data Mart for the period of July 1, 2004, to November 30, 2012. RESULTS: The most common AEs associated with chemotherapies used for melanoma were neutropenia, vomiting, and anemia. The most common AEs associated with vemurafenib were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma or keratoacanthoma, rash, and elevated liver enzymes; the most common AEs associated with dabrafenib were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma and pyrexia. Trametinib was most often associated with hypertension and rash. The most common AEs with ipilimumab were immune-related diarrhea or colitis, dyspnea, anemia, vomiting, and, less frequently, hypophysitis. The most common grade 3/4 AE with talimogene laherparepvec was cellulitis. The highest treatment costs for an AE in the outpatient setting were for neutropenia ($2092), headache ($609), and peripheral neuropathy ($539). The highest mean inpatient costs for an AE were for acute myocardial infarction, sepsis, and coma, which ranged from $31,682 to $47,069. Colitis or diarrhea, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, thrombocytopenia, hyponatremia, oliguria or anuria, hypertension, anemia, and elevated liver enzymes were associated with mean costs for hospitalization ranging from $19,122 to $26,861. CONCLUSION: The costs of managing treatment-related AEs in patients with metastatic melanoma are substantial. Effective treatments with improved safety profiles may help to reduce these costs. Until real-world evidence for the costs associated with treatment toxicity is available in the outpatient and inpatient settings, the costs estimated in this study can help inform decision makers about the cost-effectiveness of managing patients with metastatic melanoma.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin) compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). DESIGN: A semi-Markov model was constructed from a French health collective perspective, with health states related to first-line treatment (progression-free), disease progression with and without subsequent active treatment, resection of metastases, disease-free after successful resection and death. METHODS: Parametric survival analyses of patient-level progression-free and overall survival data from the only head-to-head clinical trial of panitumumab and bevacizumab (PEAK) were performed to estimate transitions to disease progression and death. Additional data from PEAK informed the amount of each drug consumed, duration of therapy, subsequent therapy use, and toxicities related to mCRC treatment. Literature and French public data sources were used to estimate unit costs associated with treatment and duration of subsequent active therapies. Utility weights were calculated from patient-level data from panitumumab trials in the first-, second- and third-line settings. A life-time perspective was applied. Scenario, one-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Based on a head-to-head clinical trial that demonstrates better efficacy outcomes for patients with wild-type RAS mCRC who receive panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6, the incremental cost per life-year gained was estimated to be €26,918, and the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was estimated to be €36,577. Sensitivity analyses indicate the model is robust to alternative parameters and assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental cost per QALY gained indicates that panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 represents good value for money in comparison to bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 and, with a willingness-to-pay ranging from €40,000 to €60,000, can be considered cost-effective in first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC.

Adherence to K/DOQI practice guidelines for bone metabolism and disease.

OBJECTIVE: To determine adherence to Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) guidelines for frequency of testing and control of parathyroid hormone (PTH), calcium, and phosphorus levels among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. METHODS: The analysis was performed with administrative claims data from large US managed care plans. Patients with CKD were identified based on claims and laboratory data. Patients were excluded if they were <18 years or >or=65 years old, had fewer than 18 months of continuous eligibility, or had renal cancer. RESULTS: A total of 793 patients were identified with CKD stages 3, 4, or 5 (n = 424, n = 212, and n = 157, respectively). Serum calcium testing was conducted according to guidelines (once a year) in a high percentage of patients with stage 3 CKD (91%); however, the percentage dropped among patients with stage 4 CKD (64%), for whom the guidelines recommend testing 4 times a year. Plasma PTH and serum phosphorus levels were tested infrequently. Among those tested, a high percentage of both stage 3 and 4 CKD patients were in K/DOQI target ranges for calcium and phosphorus. However, fewer than half of the patients tested had PTH values within the target ranges. CONCLUSION: There remains substantial opportunity to improve the quality of care with respect to bone and mineral metabolism in patients with CKD.