A cost-utility analysis of second-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. Docetaxel versus paclitaxel versus vinorelbine

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 10, Issue 5, 1996, Pages 504-521

  Launois, Robert ^a   Reboul Marty, Jeanne ^a   Henry, Bernadette ^b   Bonneterre, Jacques ^c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS 13   (France)

^b Analyses Rech sur Consommation l'O   (France)

^c CENTRE OSCAR LAMBRET   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOCETAXEL; NAVELBINE; PACLITAXEL;

ARTHRALGIA; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DEATH; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; METASTASIS; MODEL; NEUTROPENIA; NURSE; PATIENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SOCIOECONOMICS; SURVIVAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0029850549     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199610050-00008     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Benhamou E. Laplanche A. Wartelle M, et al. Incidence des cancers en France 1978-1982. Statistiques de Santé. Paris: Editions INSERM, 1990
2. Hill C. Benhamou E. Doyon F, et al. Evolution de la mortalité par cancer en France entre 1950 et 1985. Statistiques de Santé. Paris: Editions INSERM. 1989
3. Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte contre le Cancer. Enquête permanente cancer 1975/1986 - monographie des cancers du sein. Paris: Edition Doin, 1991
4. Genot JY. Cancer du sein - surveillance post-thérapeutique. Paris: Centre d'Information Régionale sur le Cancer (ClRCAN). 1994
5. Smith TJ, Hillner BE. Desch E. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of cancer treatment: rational allocation of resources based on decision analysis. J Nat Cancer Inst 1993; 85 (18): 1460-74
6. Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy in women with node-negative breast cancer: a decision-analysis model. N Engl J Med 1991; 324 (3): 160-8
7. Hillner BE. Smith TJ. A model of chemotherapy in nodenegative breast cancer. J Nat Cancer Inst Monogr 1992; 11: 143-9
8. Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Desch CE. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of autologous hone marrow transplantation in metastatic breast cancer: estimates using decision analysis while awaiting clinical trial results. JAMA 1992; 267 (15): 2055-61
9. Eddy DM. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow transplantation for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10 (4): 657-70
10. Reboul-Marty J, Henry B. Aussage P. et al. Metastatic breast cancer management in France: a representative survey [abstract]. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1996: 5 Suppl. 1: S70
11. Beck RJ. Pauker SG. The Markov process in medical prognosis. Med Decis Making 1983; 3: 419-58
12. Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Making 1993; 13: 322-38
13. Degardin M. Bonneterre J, Hecquet B. et al. Vinorelbine as a salvage treatment for advanced breast cancer. Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 423-6
14. Miller AB. Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, et al. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981; 47: 207-14
15. Hollenberg J. SMLTREE: the all-purpose decision tree builder. Boston: Pratt Medical Group, 1993: 76
16. Nabholtz JM. Gelmon K, Bontenbal M, et al. Randomized trial of two doses of paclitaxel in metastalic breast cancer: an interim analysis [abstract no. 42]. Proc Am Soc. Clin Oncol 1993; 12: 60
17. Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee. Study 048: multicentric randomized study of two doses of taxol in metastatic breast cancer. 048F01-F017.CH3, 1993
18. Docetaxel centralised procedure no. 73. Registration dossier. Part IV. Clinical documentation and updated expert report 1995. Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products - European Agency for the evaluation of Medicinal Products. 1995
19. Ten Bokkel Huinink WW. Prove AM. Picard M. et al. A phase II trial with docetaxel in second line treatment with chemotherapy tor advanced breast cancer: a study of the EORTC Early Clinical Trials Group. Ann Oncol 1994: 5 (6): 527-32
20. Valero V. Holmes FA. Walters RS. et al. Phase II trial of docetaxel: a new. highly effective antineoplastic agent in the management of patients with anthracycline-resistant metastalic hreast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13. 2886-94
21. Ravdin PM. Burris HA. Cook G. et al. Phase II trial of docetaxel in advanced anthracycline-resistant or anthracenedione-resistant breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2879-85
22. Nabholtz JM. Gelmon K, Bontenbal M. et al. Multicenter. randomized comparative study of two doses of paclitaxel in patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1858-67
23. Kleinbaum DG. Kupper LL. Mogenstern H. Epidemiologic research: principles and quantitative methods. London: Life-time Learning Publications. 1982: 529
24. Miller DK, Homan SM. Determining transition probabilities: confusion and suggestions. Med Decis Making 1994; 14: 52-8
25. Beck JR. Pauker SG. Göttlieh JE. et al. A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the DEALE). II: Use in medical decision making. Am J Med 1982; 73: 889-97
26. Nomenclature générale des actes professionnels. Paris: UCANSS, 1993: 107
27. Nomenclature des actes de biologie médicale Paris: UCANSS. 1993: 106
28. Programme de médicalisation des systèmes d'information (PMSl). Les groupes homogènes de malades (GHM). Paris: Ministère des Affaires Sociales et de l'Emploi. Bulletin Officiel no. 86-30 bis. 1986
29. Fascicule spécial PMSl-Manuel des GHM version 1. Paris: Ministère des Affaires Sociales et de la Solidarite Nationale. Bulletin Officiel no. 92-9 bis. 1992
30. Classification Internationale des Maladies. 9th revision. Vols 1 and 2. Geneva: WHO, 1977
31. L'échelle nationale des coûts relatifs par Groupe Homogène de Malades. Paris: Ministère des Affaires Sociales, de la Santé et de la Ville. Bulletins Officiels no. 95-5 bis, 1995
32. Guide méthodologique de comptabilité analytique hospitalière. Calcul des coûts des stucturcs hospitalières. Paris. Ministère des Affaires Sociales et de la Solidarité Nationale. Bulletins Officiels no. 88-14 bis, 1988
33. Guide méthodologique de comptabilité analytique hospitalière. Calcul des coûts de revient complet par Groupe Homogène de malades. Paris: Ministère des Affaires Sociales et de la Solidarité Nationale. Bulletins Officiels no. 85-26 bis. 1985
34. Launois R. Quality of life: overview and perspectives. Drug Info J 1994; 28: 123-40
35. Feeny D. Furlong W. Boyle M. et al. Multi-attribute health status classification systems: health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics 1995; 7 (6): 490-502
36. Feeny D, Furlong W, Barr RD. et al. A comprehensive multiattribute system for classifying the health status of survivors of childhood cancer. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10 (6): 923-8
37. Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, et al. Guide to design and development of health-state utility instrumentation. CHEPA Working Paper Series no. 90-9. Ontario: McMaster University, 1990: 140
38. Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of the three measurement techniques. Socioecon Planning Sci 1976; 10: 129-36
39. Dieras V, Marty M. Morvan F, et al. Essai de phase II randomisant taxol versus mitomycin dans le cancer du sein métastasé en 2ème ligne [abstract]. Analyse Intermédiaire Bulletin du Cancer 1994; 81: 450
40. Seidman AD. Tiersten A. Hudis C, et al. Phase II trial of paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion as initial and salvage chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2575-81
41. Launois R, Orvain J, Ounis I. Apport d'une mesure des utilités: infections respiratoires récidivantes. Rev Epidém et Santé Publ 1992; 40: 46-55
42. Clarridge BR, Massagli MP. The use of female spouse proxies in common symptom reporting. Med Care 1989; 4: 639-48
43. Magaziner J, Simonsick EM, Kashner TM, et al. Patient proxy response comparability on measures of patient health status and functional status. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41: 1065-74