Improving patient access to cancer drugs in India: Using economic modeling to estimate a more affordable drug cost based on measures of societal value

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 23-30

  Dranitsaris, George ^a   Truter, Ilse ^a   Lubbe, Martie S ^b   Sriramanakoppa, Nitin N ^c   Mendonca, Vivian M ^c   Mahagaonkar, Sangameshwar B ^c  

^a NELSON MANDELA METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (South Africa)

^b NORTH WEST UNIVERSITY   (South Africa)

^c PharmARC Analytic Solutions   (India)

Author keywords

Chemotherapy; Cost analysis; Drug pricing; Value

Indexed keywords

CANCER DRUG; COLORECTAL CANCER; COST ANALYSIS; DECISION ANALYSIS; DECISION MODELS; DRUG PRICING; ECONOMIC MODELING; ECONOMIC VALUES; GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCTS; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PATIENT ACCESS; PER CAPITA; PRIVATE HOSPITALS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SIDE EFFECT; VALUE; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

CHEMOTHERAPY; COST ACCOUNTING; COSTS; DECISION MAKING; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; DISEASES; DRUG DOSAGE; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ECONOMICS; ESTIMATION; HEALTH CARE; VALUE ENGINEERING;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; BEVACIZUMAB; FLUOROURACIL; FOLINIC ACID; IRINOTECAN; OXALIPLATIN;

ARTICLE; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER SURVIVAL; COLORECTAL CANCER; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HUMAN; INDIA; MODEL; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; TREATMENT RESPONSE; COLORECTAL TUMOR; ECONOMICS; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HOSPITAL; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HOSPITALS, PROPRIETARY; HOSPITALS, PUBLIC; HUMANS; INDIA; MODELS, ECONOMIC; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SOCIAL VALUES;

EID: 79955702696     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S026646231000125X     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health. Guide¬lines for the economic evaluation of health technologies, 3rd ed. Ottawa, Canada, 2006 http://www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/186- EconomicGuidelines-e.pdf (accessed November 18, 2009).
2. Central Intelligence Agency. The world fact book. 2009. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank. html (accessed November 18, 2009).
3. Chase JL. Clinical use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monoclonal antibodies in metastatic colorectal cancer. Pharma-cotherapy. 2008;28:23S-30S.
4. Church S. UK's NICE backs Pfizer's Sutent and Celgene's Revlimid. February 04, 2009. http://www.pharmastrategyblog. com/2009/02 (accessed January 18, 2010).
5. Douillard JY, Cunningham D, Roth AD, et al. Irinotecan com¬bined with fluorouracil compared with fluorouracil alone as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: A multi-centre randomized trial. Lancet. 2000;355:1041-1047. (Pubitemid 30162806)
6. Dranitsaris G, Cottrell W, Spirovski B, Hopkins S. Economic analysis of albumin-bound paclitaxel for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2009;15:67-78.
7. Dranitsaris G, Vincent M, Crowther M. Dalteparin vs. warfarin for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolic events in cancer patients: A pharmacoeconomic analysis. Pharma-coeconomics. 2006;24:593-607. (Pubitemid 43886269)
8. Drummond MF, Mason AR. European perspective on the cost and cost effectiveness of cancer therapies. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:191-195. (Pubitemid 350003033)
9. Engstrom PF. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Sys¬temic therapy for advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer: Na¬tional Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for combin¬ing anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies with chemother¬apy. Pharmacotherapy. 2008;28(pt 2):18S-22S.
10. Escudier B, Eisen T, Stadler WM, et al. Sorafenib in ad¬vanced clear cell renal carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:125-134. (Pubitemid 46089673)
11. Fojo T, Grandy C. How much is a life worth: Cetuximab, non small cell lung cancer, and the $440 billion question. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;1044-1048.
12. Gafni A. Alternatives to the QALY measure for economic eval¬uations. Support Care Cancer. 1997;5:105-111. (Pubitemid 27163450)
13. GM Freeze. GM crops around the world: An accurate picture. http://www.gmfreeze.org/uploads/GM-crops-land-area-final. pdf (accessed April 22, 2010).
14. Goldberg RM, Sargent DJ, Morton RF, et al. A randomized controlled trial of fluorouracil plus leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin combinations in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:23-30. (Pubitemid 41095110)
15. Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Efficacy does not necessarily translate to cost effectiveness. A case study in the challenges asso¬ciated with 21st century cancer drug pricing. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2111-2113.
16. Jonker DJ, O'Callaghan CJ, Karapetis CS, et al. Cetux-imab for the treatment of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2040-2048.
17. 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.
18. Leung P, Tanock IF, Oza AM, Puodziunas A, Dranitsaris G. Cost utility analysis of chemotherapy using paclitaxel, doc-etaxel or vinorelbine for patients with anthracycline-resistant breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:3082-3090 (Pubitemid 29470636)
19. Murray CJ, Evans DB, Acharya A, Baltussen RM. Development of WHO guidelines in generalized cost effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 2000;9:235-251. (Pubitemid 30248640)
20. Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, New Delhi, India. Census of India. Rural-urban distribution. http://www.censusindia.net/ (accessed April 22, 2010).
21. Ortega A, Dranitsaris G, Sturgeon J, Sutherland H, Oza A. Cost utility analysis of paclitaxel in combination with cisplatin for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1997;66:454-463. (Pubitemid 27388139)
22. Pandeya R. Outside the sick bay. Business Standard, June 28, 2007. http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/out-sidesick-bay/289269/(accessed April 20, 2010).
23. Pricewaterhouse Coopers. Emerging market report: Health care in India; 2007. http://www.pwc.com/en-GX/gx/healthcare/pdf/emerging-market-report-hc-in- india.pdf (accessed April 20 2010).
24. Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, Daniels N, Weinstein MC. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1172-1177. (Pubitemid 26329746)
25. Saltz LB, Clarke S, Diaz-Rubio E, et al. Bevacizumabin combi¬nation with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as first line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: A randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2013-2019.
26. Sarin R. Criteria for deciding cost effectiveness for expensive new anticancer agents. J Cancer Ther. 2008;4:1-2. (Pubitemid 351555993)
27. Shashikant S. More countries use compulsory license, but new problems emerge. TWN Info Service on Health Issues No. 4. May 19, 2005. http://www.twnside.org.sg/title2/health.info/twninfohealth004.htm (accessed April 27, 2010).
28. Shiroiwa T, Fukuda T, Tsutani K. Cost-effectiveness analysis of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Japan. Clin Ther. 2007;29:2256-2267. (Pubitemid 350138568)
29. Tappenden P, Jones R, Paisley S, Carroll C. Systematic review and economic evaluation of bevacizumab and cetuximab for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Health Technol Assess. 2007;11:1-128, iii-iv.
30. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guide¬lines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumours: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Can¬cer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205-216.
31. Torrance GW. Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. J Chron Dis. 1987;40:593-600. (Pubitemid 17084806)
32. Tournigand C, Andre T, Achille E, et al. FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal can¬cer: A randomized GERCOR study. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:229-237. (Pubitemid 41095086)
33. Van Cutsem E, Peeters M, Siena S, et al. Open-label phase III trial of panitumumab plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1658-1664. (Pubitemid 46797944)