Costs associated with Eribulin treatment for patients with metastatic breast cancer in a comprehensive cancer center in France
Abstract Background There is no standard recommendation for metastatic breast cancer treatment (MBC) after two chemotherapy regimens. Eribulin (Halaven® ) has shown a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) in this setting. Its use may however be hampered by its cost, which is up to three t...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Breast (Edinburgh) 2016-12, Vol.30, p.73-79 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Abstract Background There is no standard recommendation for metastatic breast cancer treatment (MBC) after two chemotherapy regimens. Eribulin (Halaven® ) has shown a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) in this setting. Its use may however be hampered by its cost, which is up to three times the cost of other standard drugs. We report the clinical outcomes and health care costs of a large series of consecutive MBC patients treated with Eribulin. Methods A monocentric retrospective study was conducted at Institut Curie over 1 year (August 2012 to August 2013). Data from patient's medical records were extracted to estimate treatment and outcome patterns, and direct medical costs until the end of treatment were measured. Factors affecting cost variability were identified by multiple linear regressions and factors linked to OS by a multivariate Cox model. Results We included 87 MBC patients. The median OS was 10.7 months (95%CI = 8.0–13.3). By multivariate Cox analysis, independent factors of poor prognosis were an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 3, a number of metastatic sites ≥ 4 and the need for hospitalization. Per-patient costs during whole treatment were €18,694 [CI 95%: 16,028–21,360], and €2581 [CI 95%: 2226–3038] per month. Eribulin administration contributed to 79% of per-patient costs. Conclusions Innovative and expensive drugs often appear to be the main cost drivers in cancer treatment, particularly for MBC. There is an urgent need to assess clinical practice benefits. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0960-9776 1532-3080 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.breast.2016.08.015 |