Assessing the need for quality-adjusted cost-effectiveness studies of nanotechnological cancer therapies

Nanomedicine

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 487-497

  Bosetti, Rita ^a   Marneffe, Wim ^a   Vereeck, Lode ^a  

^a HASSELT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

cancer; chemotherapy; cost effectiveness analysis; cost utility analysis; knowledge gaps; liposomes; nanotherapy

Indexed keywords

AMPHOTERICIN B LIPID COMPLEX; DAUNORUBICIN; DOCETAXEL; DOXORUBICIN; GEMCITABINE; PACLITAXEL; RAZOXANE; TOPOTECAN;

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER THERAPY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG SAFETY; HEALTH CARE COST; HEART PROTECTION; HOSPITAL COST; HUMAN; KAPOSI SARCOMA; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MULTIPLE MYELOMA; NANOTECHNOLOGY; NASOPHARYNX CANCER; NONHODGKIN LYMPHOMA; OVARY CANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

EID: 84874876416     PISSN: 17435889     EISSN: 17486963     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/nnm.13.15     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Sarin R. Criteria for deciding cost-effectiveness for expensive new anti-cancer agents. J. Cancer Res. Ther. 4(1), 1-2 (2008)
2. Hullmann A. Who is winning the global nanorace? Nat. Nanotechnol. 1, 81-83 (2006)
3. Bosetti R, Vereeck L. The future of nanomedicines: obstacles and remedies. Nanomedicine 6(4), 747-755 (2011)
4. Chan VSW. Nanomedicine: an unresolved regulatory issue. Regul. Toxicol. Pharm. 46(3), 218-224 (2006)
5. Orive G, Hernandez RM, Gascon AR et al. Micro and nano drug delivery systems in cancer therapy. Cancer Ther. 3, 131-138 (2005)
6. Bawa R. Patents and nanomedicines. Nanomedicine 2(3), 351-374 (2007)
7. Bosetti R, Vereeck L. The impact of effective patents on future innovations in nanomedicines. Pharm. Pat. Analyst 1(1), 37-43 (2012)
8. Barenholz YC. Doxil -the first FDA-approved nano-drug: lessons learned. J. Control. Release 160, 117-134 (2012)
9. Orszag PR, Ellis P. Addressing rising health care costs -a view from the Congressional Budget Office. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 1885-1887 (2007)
10. Gafni A, Birch S. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the silence of the lambda. Soc. Sci. Med. 62(9), 2091-2100 (2006)
11. Smith DH, Adams JR, Johnston SRD, Gordon A, Drummond MF, Bennett C. A comparative economic analysis of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus topotecan in ovarian cancer in the USA and the UK. Ann. Oncol. 13(10), 1590-1597 (2002)
12. Cagnoni PJ, Walsh TJ, Prendergast MM. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of liposomal amphotericin B versus convention amphotericin B in the empirical treatment of persistently febrile neutropenic patients with systemic fungal infections. J. Clin. Oncol. 18(12), 2476-2483 (2000)
13. Capri S, Cattaneo G. Cost-minimization analysis of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus topotecan for the treatment of ovarian cancer in Italy. Clin. Ther. 25(6), 1826-1845 (2003)
14. Forbes C, Wilby J, Richardson G, Sculpher M, Mather L, Riemsma R. A systematic review and economic evaluation of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride for ovarian cancer. Health Technol. Assess. 6(23), 1-119 (2002)
15. Gradishar W, Wolinsky S, Vishalpura T, Nightengale B, Bramley T. Cost-effectiveness of nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab) paclitaxel (ABX) vs cremophor-based paclitaxel (CP) in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). J. Clin. Oncol. 22(14), 635-639 (2004)
16. Hjortsberg C, Persson U, Lidbrink E, Bennet C. Cost-effectiveness analysis of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and liposomal daunorubicin treatments in patients with Kaposi's Sarcoma. Acta Oncol. 38(8), 1063-1067 (1999)
17. Limat S, Demesmey K, Fagnoni P et al. Cost-effectiveness of cardioprotective strategies in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Clin. Drug Invest. 25(11), 719-729 (2005)
18. Main C, Bojke L, Griffin S et al. Topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride and paclitaxel for second-line or subsequent treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol. Assess. 10(9), 1-132 (2006)
19. Ojeda B, de Sande LM, Casado A, Merino P, Casado MA. Cost-minimisation analysis of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride versus topotecan in the treatment of patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer in Spain. Brit. J. Cancer 89(6), 1002-1007 (2003)
20. Gordon AN, Fleagle JT, Guthrie D, Parkin DE, Gore ME, Lacave AJ. Recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma: a randomized Phase III study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus topotecan. J. Clin. Oncol. 19(14), 3312-3322 (2001)
21. Weintraub WS, Cohen DJ. The limits of cost-effectiveness analysis. Circulation 2, 55-58 (2009)
22. Vanni T, Fonseca BAL, Polanczyk CA. Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of AIDS2011;related Kaposi's sarcoma in Brazil. HIV Clin. Trials 7(4), 194-202 (2006)
23. Porter CA, Rifkin RM. Clinical benefits and economic analysis of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin/vincristine/dexamethasone versus doxorubicin/vincristine/dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Clin. Lymphoma Myeloma 7(4), 150-155 (2007)
24. Fountzilas G, Papakostas P, Dafni U et al. Paclitaxel and gemcitabine vs. paclitaxel and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in advanced non-nasopharyngeal head and neck cancer. An efficacy and cost analysis randomized study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group. Ann. Oncol. 17, 1560-1567 (2006)
25. Stinchcombe TE. Nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel: a novel cremophor2011;EL-free formulation of paclitaxel. Nanomedicine 2(4), 415-423 (2007)
26. 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. 15(2), 67-78 (2008)
27. Ioannis SV. Nanomedicine and personalized medicine toward the application of pharmacotyping in clinical practice to improve drug-delivery outcomes. Nanomedicine 7, 11-17 (2011)
28. Chalkidou K, Rawlins M. Pharmacogenetics and cost-effectiveness analysis: a two-way street. Drug Discov. Today 16(19), 873-877 (2011)
29. Cohen JP. Overcoming regulatory and economic challenges facing pharmacogenomics. N. Biotechnol. 29(6), 751-756 (2012)