RESUMO
Background: Gene expression tests can inform decisions on whether to recommend or omit chemotherapy for patients with early HR+, HER2- breast cancer. The benefit of these tests is well established and fully reimbursed by sickness funds for lymph node-negative (pN0) patients in Germany. A budget impact model was built to evaluate the effect of using the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® test also for node-positive (pN1: 1-3 positive lymph nodes) patients. Methods: The prospective randomized clinical trial, RxPONDER, defined conditions (Recurrence Score result 0-25 for postmenopausal patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes) under which omitting chemotherapy does not significantly impact invasive disease-free survival with results currently reported for 5-year follow-up. The present budget impact model calculates average total cost per node-positive patient versus no testing from a sickness funds perspective, taking into account not only the budgetary impact of avoiding chemotherapy and associated side effects, but also the costs of treating those patients who develop distant metastasis. The stability of the results was investigated by probabilistic multivariate sensitivity analysis. Results: After deducting testing cost, applying the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test yielded an average savings per node-positive patient of EUR 4,272. Without the test costs, the greatest savings resulted from reductions in direct treatment costs and costs arising from the treatment of chemotherapy-related side effects, which together averaged EUR 6,677. The targeted use of chemotherapy after testing also resulted in slightly lower costs for treatment of distant metastasis, if it did occur. The multivariate sensitivity analysis also almost exclusively resulted in cost savings. Conclusion: Analogous to the pN0 situation, this budget impact model demonstrates that the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test can also reduce healthcare costs in Germany in treatment of node-positive (pN1: 1-3 positive lymph nodes) patients by minimizing both unnecessary chemotherapy and undertreatment. Additional benefits to patients would include reduced morbidity and improved quality of life for those patients who can safely avoid chemotherapy or undertreatment.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Studies have reported that the presence of elevated anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA)/RF levels, together with joint erosions, is associated with higher disease burden in terms of disability and mortality in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Abatacept has been shown to be effective in this patient population with favourable comparative data against adalimumab. However, few studies have investigated the cost-effectiveness of abatacept in this population to similar treatments such as TNFs. The objective of the study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of abatacept to adalimumab as a first bDMARD in ACPA-positive RA patients who failed treatment with methotrexate (MTX) in Germany. METHODS: A decision tree model was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness, from a payer's perspective, of different treatment sequences in RA over a two year time frame. The effectiveness criteria were defined as achieving the treatment target measured by the Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28(CRP)<2.6; "remission"). A treatment switch to a different biologic as 2nd line and 3rd line bDMARD was allowed - in case of not achieving remission with therapy - every 6 months over a two year time period. Effectiveness data was based on randomised controlled trials (RCT) identified by an updated previous systematic literature search by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG). Costs of medication and other direct medical costs were considered. Cost-effectiveness of RA treatment was investigated in ACPA-positive patients and presented as overall costs per day in remission. RESULTS: For ACPA-positive patients, treatment strategies including early treatment with abatacept had lower total costs per clinical outcome compared to later use. Treatment sequences starting with abatacept resulted in lower costs per day in remission (mean 330 /day, range 328-333 /day) compared to sequences starting with adalimumab (mean 384 /day, range 378-390 /day). Choice of the second or third biologic in the treatment sequences appears to have little impact on the costs per outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis suggest that in ACPA-positive RA patients treatment with abatacept appears to have lower costs per response (remission) compared to treatment with adalimumab as a first bDMARD.
