Spend less to achieve more: Economic analysis of intermittent versus continuous cetuximab in KRAS wild-type patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

In 2014, the COIN-B clinical trial demonstrated that intermittent cetuximab (IC) was a safe alternative to continuous cetuximab (CC), with less cytotoxic chemotherapy, in first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Cetuximab has been available for this indication in...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of cancer policy 2022-09, Vol.33, p.100342, Article 100342
Hauptverfasser: Henderson, Raymond H., French, Declan, McFerran, Ethna, Adams, Richard, Wasan, Harpreet, Glynne-Jones, Robert, Fisher, David, Richman, Susan, Dunne, Philip D., Wilde, Lisa, Maughan, Timothy S., Sullivan, Richard, Lawler, Mark
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In 2014, the COIN-B clinical trial demonstrated that intermittent cetuximab (IC) was a safe alternative to continuous cetuximab (CC), with less cytotoxic chemotherapy, in first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Cetuximab has been available for this indication in England since 2015, but treatment breaks beyond 6 weeks were prohibited, despite real-world evidence that therapy de-escalation maintains equivalent disease control, but with superior Quality-of-Life (QoL). We performed health economic analyses of IC versus CC and used this evidence to help underpin policy change and guide clinical practice through reduction in unnecessary treatment for mCRC patients. Employing cost-minimization analysis, we conducted partitioned survival modelling (PSM) and Markov Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) simulation to determine costs and quality-adjusted-life-years for IC versus CC. IC reduced costs by £ 35,763 (PSM; p 
ISSN:2213-5383
2213-5383
DOI:10.1016/j.jcpo.2022.100342