Using decision modeling to determine pricing of new pharmaceuticals: The case of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist antiemetics for cancer chemotherapy

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 289-295

  Dranitsaris, George ^a   Leung, Pauline ^b  

^a CANCER CARE ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b BRITISH COLUMBIA CANCER AGENCY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Antiemetics; Chemotherapy; Cost analysis; NK 1 receptor antagonists; Pricing

Indexed keywords

COST EFFECTIVENESS; DECISION MAKING; DISEASE CONTROL; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; HEALTH CARE; MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR (QALY);

DRUG PRODUCTS PLANTS;

ANTIEMETIC AGENT; CISPLATIN; DEXAMETHASONE; GRANISETRON; NEUROKININ 1 RECEPTOR ANTAGONIST;

ARTICLE; CANADA; CANCER; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG COST; DRUG FORMULARY; HUMAN; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; VOMITING;

EID: 4043087609     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462304001102     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Blumenschein K, Johannesson M. Economic evaluation in healthcare: A brief history and future directions. Pharmacoeconomics. 1996;2:114-122.
2. Campos D, Pereira JR, Reinhardt RR, et al. Prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis by the oral neurokinin-1 antagonist, MK-869, in combination with granisetron and dexamethasone or with dexamethasone alone. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:1759-1767.
3. Cocquyt V, Van Belle S, Reinhardt RR. Comparison of L-758,298, a prodrug for the selective neurokinin-1 antagonist, L-754,030, with ondansetron for the prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37:835-842.
4. Dranitsaris G, De Angelis C, Warr D, Narine L. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of prophylactic treatments for emesis secondary to breast cancer chemotherapy. Can J Hosp Pharm. 1995;48:266-275.
5. Dranitsaris G, Leung P, Warr D. Implementing evidence based guidelines in the oncology setting: Results of a four-month prospective intervention study. Support Care Cancer. 2001;9:611-618.
6. Drummond M, Brandt A, Luce B, et al. Standardizing methodologies for economic evaluation in health care: Practice problems and potential. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1993;9:26-36.
7. Drummond MF, Stoddard GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications; 1987.
8. Einarson TR. Pharmacoeconomic applications of meta-analysis for single groups using antifungal onychomycosis lacquers as an example. Clin Ther. 1997;19:559-568.
9. Gafni A. Alternatives to the QALY measure for economic evaluations. Support Care Cancer. 1997;5:105-111.
10. Gardner CJ, Twissell DJ, Dale JD, et al. The broad-spectrum anti-emetic activity of the novel non-peptide tachykinin NK1 receptor antagonist GR203040. Br J Pharmacol. 1995;116:3158-3163.
11. Goedhals L, Heron JF, Kleisbauer JP, et al. Control of delayed nausea and vomiting with granisetron plus dexamethasone or dexamethasone alone in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, comparative study. Ann Oncol. 1998;9:661-666.
12. Gralla RJ, Tittenberg C, Peralta M, et al. Capsulation and emesis: Aspects of treatment and a new trial for delayed emesis using oral dexamethasone plus ondansetron beginning at 16 hours after cisplatin. Oncology. 1996;53(Suppl 1):86-91.
13. Heron JF, Goedhals L, Jordaan JP, et al. Oral granisetron alone and in combination with dexamethasone: A double blind randomized comparison against high-dose metoclopramide plus dexamethasone in prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis. Ann Oncol. 1994;5:579-584.
14. 3 receptor antagonists. Support Care Cancer. 1994;2:286-292.
15. Hesketh PJ, Gralla RT, Webb RT, et al. Randomized phase II study of the neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist CJ-11,974 in the control of cisplatin-induced emesis. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:338-343.
16. Hesketh PJ, Harvey WH, Harker WG, et al. A randomized, double-blind comparison of intravenous ondansetron alone and in combination with intravenous dexamethasone in the prevention of high-dose cisplatin-induced emesis. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:596-600.
17. Italian Group for Antiemetic Research. Ondansetron versus granisetron, both combined with dexamethasone, in the prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis. Ann Oncol. 1995;6:805-810.
18. Joss AL, Hill AS, Soukop M, et al. Ondansetron plus dexamethasone is superior to ondansetron alone in the prevention of emesis in chemotherapy-naïve and previously treated patients. Ann Oncol. 1994;5:253-258.
19. Kris MG, Gralla RJ, Clark RA, et al. Incidence, course, and severity of delayed nausea and vomiting following the administration of high-dose cisplatin. J Clin Oncol. 1985;3:1379-1384.
20. Latreille J, Pater J, Johnston D, et al. Use of dexamethasone and granisetron in the control of delayed emesis for patients who receive highly emetogenic chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:1174-1178.
21. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. Can Med Assoc J. 1992;146:473-481.
22. Martin M. The severity and pattern of emesis following different cytotoxic agents. Oncology. 1996;53(Suppl 1):26-31.
23. Navari RM, Reinhart RR, Gralla RJ. Reduction of cisplatin-induced emesis by a selective neurokinin-1-receptor antagonist. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:190-195.
24. Naylor DC, Williams I, Basinski A, et al. Technology assessment and cost-effectiveness analysis: Misguided guidelines? Can Med Assoc J. 1993;148:921-924.
25. Ortega A, Dranitsaris G, Sturgeon J, et al. Cost-utility analysis of paclitaxel in combination with cisplatin for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1997;66:454-463.
26. 3 receptor antagonists in the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis. Oncology. 1996;53(Suppl 1):78-85.
27. 3 receptor antagonists in patients receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Toronto; 1999.
28. 3 receptor antagonists: Differences and similarities. Eur J Cancer. 1997;33:1364-1370.
29. Roila F, Tonato M, Ballatori E, Del Favero A. Comparative studies of various antiemetic regimens. Support Care Cancer. 1996;4:270-280.
30. Tonato M, Roila F, Del Favero A. Are there differences among the serotonin antagonists? Support Care Cancer. 1994;2:293-296.
31. Torrance GW. Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. J Chron Dis. 1987;40:593-600.
32. Verweij J, de Wit R, de Mulder P. Optimal control of acute cisplatin-induced emesis. Oncology. 1996;53(Suppl 1):56-64.