Cost-effectiveness of erlotinib versus docetaxel for second-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in the United Kingdom

Journal of International Medical Research

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 9-21

  Lewis, G ^a   Peake, M ^b   Aultman, R ^c   Gyldmark, M ^c   Morlotti, L ^d   Creeden, J ^c   De La Orden, Margarita ^a  

^a ROCHE PRODUCTS LTD   (United Kingdom)

^b GLENFIELD HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c F HOFFMANN LA ROCHE LTD   (Switzerland)

^d Analytica International   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness analysis; Docetaxel; Erlotinib; Non small cell lung cancer

Indexed keywords

DOCETAXEL; ERLOTINIB; PLACEBO;

ADULT; ADVANCED CANCER; AGED; ANOREXIA; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CANCER RELAPSE; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; DIARRHEA; DRUG COST; DRUG DOSE SEQUENCE; FATIGUE; FEBRILE NEUTROPENIA; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INFECTION; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; NAUSEA; NEUROPATHY; NEUTROPENIA; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL; POPULATION DYNAMICS; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RASH; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STOMATITIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 77749283763     PISSN: 03000605     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/147323001003800102     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Cancer Research UK: Lung Cancer: UK Lung Cancer Incidence Statistics. London: Cancer Research UK, 2009 (available at: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/lung/incidence/).
2. Cancer Research UK: Lung Cancer: UK Lung Cancer Mortality Statistics. London: Cancer Research UK, 2009 (available at: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/lung/mortality/).
3. Sculier JP, Fry WA: Malignant Tumors of the Lung: Evidence-based Management. New York: Springer, 2004.
4. Hollen PJ, Gralla RJ, Kris MG, et al: Normative data and trends in quality of life from the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS). Support Care Cancer 1999; 7: 140-148.
5. Filderman AE, Shaw C, Matthay RA: Lung cancer. Part I: etiology, pathology, natural history, manifestations, and diagnostic techniques. Invest Radiol 1986; 21: 80-90.
6. Schiller JH, Harrington D, Belani CP, et al: Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 92-98.
7. Shepherd FA, Dancey J, Ramlau R, et al: Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus best supportive care in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2095-2103.
8. Dancey J, Shepherd FA, Gralla RJ, et al: Quality of life assessment of second-line docetaxel versus best supportive care in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy: results of a prospective, randomized phase III trial. Lung Cancer 2004; 43: 183-194.
9. Fossella FV, DeVore R, Kerr RN, et al: Randomized phase III trial of docetaxel versus vinorelbine or ifosfamide in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens. The TAX 320 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2354-2362.
10. Hanna N, Shepherd FA, Fossella FV, et al: Randomized phase III trial of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 1589-1597.
11. Wailoo A, Sutton A, Morgan A: The risk of febrile neutopenia in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with docetaxel: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 2009; 100: 436-441.
12. Kuderer NM, Dale DC, Crawford J, et al: Mortality, morbidity, and cost associated with febrile neutropenia in adult cancer patients. Cancer 2006; 106: 2258-2266.
13. Moyer JD, Barbacci EG, Iwata KK, et al: Induction of apoptosis and cell cycle arrest by CP-358,774, an inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase. Cancer Res 1997; 57: 4838-4848.
14. Salomon DS, Brandt R, Ciardiello F, et al: Epidermal growth factor-related peptides and their receptors in human malignancies. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 1995; 19: 183-232.
15. Arteaga C: Targeting HER1/EGFR: a molecular approach to cancer therapy. Semin Oncol 2003; 30(3 suppl 7): 3-14.
16. Giaccone G: HER1/EGFR-targeted agents: predicting the future for patients with unpredictable outcomes to therapy. Ann Oncol 2005; 16: 538-548.
17. Shepherd FA, Rodrigues Pereira J, Ciuleanu T, et al: Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 123-132.
18. Ramalingam S, Sandler AB: Salvage therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: factors influencing treatment selection. Oncologist 2006; 11: 655-665.
19. Kim ES, Hirsh V, Mok T, et al: Gefitinib versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (INTEREST): a randomised phase III trial. Lancet 2008; 372: 1809-1818.
20. Bezjak A, Tu D, Seymour L, et al: Symptom improvement in lung cancer patients treated with erlotinib: quality of life analysis of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study BR.21. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3831-3837.
21. Lynch TJ Jr, Kim ES, Eaby B, et al: Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-associated cutaneous toxicities: an evolving paradigm in clinical management. Oncologist 2007; 12: 610-621.
22. Holmes J, Dunlop D, Hemmett L, et al: A cost-effectiveness analysis of docetaxel in the second-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22: 581-594.
23. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): Docetaxel, Paclitaxel, Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine for the Treatment of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer. NICE Technology Appraisal 26. London: NICE, 2001 (available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/TA26). Updated and incorporated into NICE Clinical Guideline 24 (available at http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/ cg024fullguideline.pdf).
24. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): Erlotinib for the Treatment of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer. NICE Technology Appraisal 162. London: NICE, 2008 (available at: http://www.nice.org. uk/Guidance/TA162).
25. Hawkins N, Scott DA, Woods B, et al: No study left behind: a network meta-analysis in non-small cell lung cancer demonstrating the importance of considering all relevant data. Value Health 2009; 12: 996-1003.
26. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: NICE, 2008 (available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/media/B52/A7/TAMethodsGuideUpdatedJune2008.pdf).
27. Eli Lilly and Company: Pemetrexed in the Treatment of Non-small-cell Lung Cancer. Single Technology Appraisal (STA) Submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Basingstoke: Eli Lilly and Company, 2006 (available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/Lungcancer- pemetrexed-mansub.pdf).
28. Rabin R, de Charro F: EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001; 33: 337-343.
29. Tabberer M, Stamuli E, Walker M, et al: Utilities associated with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a community study. Value Health 2006; 9: A298 (abstract PCN74).
30. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): Briefing Paper for Methods Review Workshop on Key Issues in Utility Measurement. London: NICE, 2007 (available at http://www.nice.org.uk/media/4A6/59/ UtilitiesBriefingPaper010607KT.pdf).
31. Parkin D, Devlin N: Is there a case for using visual analogue scale valuations in cost-utility analysis? Health Econ 2006 15: 653-664.
32. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): Final Appraisal Determination: Erlotinib for the Treatment of Non-small-cell Lung Cancer. London: NICE, 2008 (available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/ pdf/ErlotinibFAD3220908.pdf).
33. Personal Social Services Research Unit Hospital and Community Health Services (PSSRU): Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2008: Inflation Indices. London: PSSRU, 2008 (available at: http://www.pssru.ac.uk/pdf/uc/ uc2008/uc2008-inflationindices.pdf.
34. British Medical Association and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain: British National Formulary 51. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 2006.
35. Devlin N, Parkin D: Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. Health Econ 2004; 13: 437-452.
36. Summerhayes M: The impact of workload changes and staff availability on IV chemotherapy services. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2003; 9: 123-128.
37. Pompen M, Novak A, Postmus P, et al: Pharmacoeconomic (PE) analysis of the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in The Netherlands demonstrates that erlotinib dominates docetaxel and is cost-effective over best supportive care (BSC) without need for patient stratification. Value Health 2006; 9: A203 (abstract CN3).
38. Orlewska E, Szczȩsna A, Gyldmark M, et al: Cost effectiveness of erlotinib in the treatment of advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Poland. Value Health 2006; 9: A279 (abstract PCN12).
39. Rubio Terres C, Álvarez Sanz C, Marlene Gylmark GM: Pharmacoeconomic analysis of therapy with erlotinib, docetaxel, pemetrexed or best supportive care in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer who have failed previous chemotherapy regimens. Value Health 2006; 9: A283-A284 (abstract PCN26).
40. Kotowa W, Gatzemeier U, Pirk O, et al: A comparison of the estimated costs of erlotinib, docetaxel and pemetrexed for the second-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer from the German healthcare perspective. J Med Econ 2007; 10: 255-271.
41. Ramsey SD, Clarke L, Kamath TV, et al: Evaluation of erlotinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: impact on the budget of a US health insurance plan. J Manag Care Pharm 2006; 12: 472-478.