An economic evaluation of docetaxel and paclitaxel regimens in metastatic breast cancer in the UK

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 27, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 847-859

  Benedict, Ágnes ^a,e   Cameron, David A ^b   Corson, Hélène ^c   Jones, Stephen E ^d  

^a UNITED BIOSOURCE CORPORATION   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^c SANOFI   (France)

^d Developmental Therapeutics Committee and Co Chair of the Genitourinary Committee   (United States)

^e NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTHRACYCLINE; COLONY STIMULATING FACTOR; DOCETAXEL; GRANULOCYTE COLONY STIMULATING FACTOR; PACLITAXEL;

ANEMIA; ARTICLE; ASTHENIA; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; BREAST CANCER; BREAST METASTASIS; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; DIARRHEA; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; FEBRILE NEUTROPENIA; FEMALE; HAZARD RATIO; HUMAN; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; NAIL DISEASE; NAUSEA; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PAIN; PERIPHERAL EDEMA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SKIN DISEASE; STOMATITIS; TREATMENT RESPONSE; UNITED KINGDOM; VOMITING;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS, PHYTOGENIC; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MARKOV CHAINS; MODELS, ECONOMIC; NEOPLASM METASTASIS; PACLITAXEL; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; TAXOIDS;

EID: 70349935286     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11792027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/10899510-000000000-00000     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Hanauske A-R, Degen D, Hilsenbeck SG, et al. Effects of taxotere and taxol on in vitro colony formation of freshly explanted human tumor cells. Anticancer Drugs 1992; 3:121-124 (Pubitemid 23008973)
2. Bissery M-C, Nohynek G, Sanderink G-J, et al. Docetaxel (taxotere): a review of preclinical and clinical experience. Part I: preclinical experience. Anticancer Drugs 1995; 6: 339-355
3. Jones SE, Erban J, Overmoyer B, et al. Randomized phase III study of docetaxel compared with paclitaxel in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 5542-5551 (Pubitemid 46300148)
4. Stockler M, Wilcken NR, Ghersi D, et al. Systematic reviews of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy in metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 2000; 26: 151-168 (Pubitemid 30330662)
5. NICE. NICE clinical guidance 81. Advanced breast cancer: diagnosis and treatment. London: 2009 Feb [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org. uk/nicemedia/pdf/CG81NICEGuideline.pdf [Accessed 2009 Sep 20]
6. Tax311: clinical study report. Paris: Aventis (Data on file)
7. Verrill MW, Lee J, Cameron DA. Anglo-Celtic IV: first results of a UK National Cancer Research Network randomised phase 3 pharmacogenetic trial of weekly versus 3 weekly paclitaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (ABC) [presentation]. ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings Part I; 2007 Jun 1-5; Chicago (IL). J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: LBA1005
8. Perez EA, Vogel CL, Irwin DH, et al. Multicenter phase II trial of weekly paclitaxel in women with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19 (22): 4216-4223 (Pubitemid 33081639)
9. Gradishar WJ, Tjulandin S, Davidson N, et al. Phase III trial of nanoparticle albumibound paclitaxel compared with polyethylated castor oil-based paclitaxel in women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7794-7803 (Pubitemid 46657376)
10. Seidman A. CALGB 9840: phase III study of weekly paclitaxel via 1-hour infusion versus standard 3h infusion every third week in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC), with trastuzumab (T) for HER2 positive MBC and randomized for T in HER2 normal MBC [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 512
11. US FDA. Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee Meeting. Silver Spring: nab-P Abraxis BioScience, Inc., 2006 Sep 7
12. Lee E, Wang JW. Statistical methods for survival data analysis. 3rd ed. Indianapolis: Wiley Interscience, 2003
13. Anglo Celtic Cooperative Oncology Group. Will Weekly Win patient level trial data, provided to the authors 2007. (Data on file.)
14. Lloyd A, Nafees B, Narewska J. Health state utilities for metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2006; 95 (6): 683-690 (Pubitemid 44373482)
15. Brown RE, Hutton J, Burrell A. Cost effectiveness of treatment options in advanced breast cancer in the UK. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19: 1091-1102 (Pubitemid 33135697)
16. Prescribing issues in breast cancer. Bristol: Avon, Somerset and Wiltshire Cancer Services (ASWCS) Network, 2001
17. British National Formulary [online]. Available from URL: http://www.bnf.org [Accessed 2006 Jul]
18. NHS reference costs 2005-6 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/13/32/25/04133225.xls [Accessed 2006 Sep 28]
19. Sanofi-Aventis. Adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: cost-effectiveness and cost-utility models. Paris: Sanofi-Aventis, 2005 May
20. NHS reference costs 2005. TOPSFAA. Appendix NSRC4 - NHS Trust and PCT combined reference cost schedules [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/ Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/ PublicationsPolicy AndGuidance/DH-062884 [Accessed: 2009 Aug]
21. Sanofi-Aventis. Adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: a physician survey. Paris: Sanofi-Aventis, 2005 May 24. (Data on file.)
22. NHS reference costs 2005. TNELIP. Appendix NSRC5 - Non NHS providers schedules [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/ Publicationsandstatistics /Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH-062884 [Accessed 2009 Aug]
23. Mansel R, Locker G, Fallowfield L, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of anastrozole versus tamoxifen in adjuvant therapy for early stage breast cancer in the United Kingdom: the 5-year completed treatment analysis of the ATAC ('Arimidex', tamoxifen alone or in combination) trial. Br J Cancer 2007 Jul 16; 97 (2): 152-161 (Pubitemid 47057463)
24. Remák E, Brazil L. Cost of managing women presenting with stage IV breast cancer in the United Kingdom. Br J Cancer 2004; 91 (1): 77-83 (Pubitemid 39013048)
25. NICE, Updated guide to the methods of technology appraisal - June 2008, London: NICE [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/media/B52/A7/ TAMethodsGuideUp datedJune2008.pdf [Accessed 2009 Sep 20]
26. Briggs A. Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: statistical representation of parameter uncertainty. Value Health 2005 Jan; 8 (1): 1-2 (Pubitemid 40293635)
27. Brown RE, Hutton J. Cost-utility model comparing docetaxel and paclitaxel in advanced breast cancer patients. Anticancer Drugs 1998 Nov; 9 (10): 899-907 (Pubitemid 29012280)
28. Hutton J, Brown R, Borowitz M, et al. A new decision model for cost-utility comparisons of chemotherapy in recurrent metastatic breast cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 9 Suppl. 2: 8-22 (Pubitemid 26387568)
29. Yee GC. Cost-utility analysis of taxane therapy. Am J Health Syst Pharm 1997 Dec 15; 54 (24 Suppl. 2): S11-5
30. Vu T, Ellard S, Speers CH, et al. Survival outcome and cost-effectiveness with docetaxel and paclitaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a population-based evaluation. Ann Oncol 2008 Mar; 19 (3): 461-464 (Pubitemid 351325665)
31. Winer EP, Berry DA, Woolf S, et al. Failure of higher-dose paclitaxel to improve outcome in patients with metastatic breast cancer: cancer and leukemia group B trial 9342. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 2061-2068 (Pubitemid 41095138)
32. 2 as second line chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer [abstract 327]. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002; 76 (Suppl. 1): S88