Cost considerations in the treatment of colorectal cancer

Lifetime direct healthcare costs of treating colorectal cancer: a systematic review

Colorectal cancer is a global public health issue and imposes a significant economic burden on populations and healthcare systems. This paper systematically reviews the literature to estimate the direct costs of colorectal cancer incurred during different phases of treatment (initial, continuing and end of life). MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of science, Evidence-based medicine reviews: National health service economic evaluation database guide, econlit and grey literature from the 1st of January 2000 to the 1st of February 2020. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Evers' Consensus on health economic criteria checklist. In total, 39,489 records were retrieved, and 17 studies were included. Costs by phase of treatment varied due to heterogeneity. However, studies that examined average costs for each phase of treatment showed a V-shaped distribution where the initial and end of life phases contribute the most and the continuing phase the least. The initial phase ranged from $7,893 to $60,289; the continuing annual phase ranged from $2,323 to $15,744; and the end of life phase ranged from $15,916 to $99,687. Studies that provided the total cost of each phase conversely showed that the continuing phase was the highest contributor to the cost of treating CRC. This study estimates the cost of the contemporary management of colorectal cancer despite the methodological heterogeneity. These costs place a heavy burden on healthcare providers, patients and their families. Identifying these costs can impact health care budgets and guide policymakers in making informed decisions for the future.

Adjuvant 5-Fluorouracil/leucovorin, capecitabine, and oxaliplatin-related regimens for stage II/III colon cancer patients 66 years or older

Adjuvant chemotherapy of leucovorin-modulated 5-fluorouracil (5-FU/LV), capecitabine, and adding oxaliplatin to 5-FU/LV or capecitabine (FLOX/OX) have been standard regimens for high-risk stage II or III colon cancer (CC). We aimed to evaluate their patterns of use, association with survival, and rate of emergency room visit (ER) or hospitalization during the treatment period. High-risk stage II or III patients aged >65 years diagnosed between 2007 and 2015, underwent colectomy, and received any of these three regimens were selected from SEER and Texas Cancer Registry (TC) linked with Medicare data. Chi-square test, Kaplan-Meier survival curves, Cox regression, and logistic regression were used in data analysis. A total of 5621 (1080 stage II and 4541 stage III) patients with median age of 72 years were included in this study. For stage II, 24.4% used 5-FU/LV, 31.2% used capecitabine, and 44.4% used FLOX/OX; the respective numbers for stage III were 13.8%, 17.9%, and 68.3%. Patients aged <70 years, not in the West region, not in Medicare state-buy-in program, and with no comorbidity were more likely to use FLOX/OX. FLOX/OX was associated with improved overall survival (OS) in stage II and III patients and improved cancer-specific survival in stage III patients compared with 5-FU/LV. The survival benefit of FLOX/OX was sustained in stage III patients aged ≥70 years. Capecitabine had the lowest ER/hospitalization rate with 19.2% in stage II and 28.9% in III. The use of FLOX/OX was associated with improved survival compared with 5-FU/LV among CC patients. Capecitabine was associated with the lowest ER/hospitalization rate.

The role of artificial intelligence based systems for cost optimization in colorectal cancer prevention programs

Colorectal Cancer (CRC) has seen a dramatic increase in incidence globally. In 2019, colorectal cancer accounted for 1.15 million deaths and 24.28 million disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) worldwide. In India, the annual incidence rates (AARs) for colon cancer was 4.4 per 100,000. There has been a steady rise in the prevalence of CRC in India which may be attributed to urbanization, mass migration of population, westernization of diet and lifestyle practices and a rise of obesity and metabolic risk factors that place the population at a higher risk of CRC. Moreoever, CRC in India differs from that described in the Western countries, with a higher proportion of young patients and more patients presenting with an advanced stage. This may be due to poor access to specialized healthcare and socio-economic factors. Early identification of adenomatous colonic polyps, which are well-recognized pre-cancerous lesions, at the time of screening colonoscopy has been shown to be the most effective measure used for CRC prevention. However, colonic polyps are frequently missed during colonoscopy and moreover, these screening programs necessitate man-power, time and resources for processing resected polyps, that may hamper penetration and efficacy in mid- to low-income countries. In the last decade, there has been significant progress made in the automatic detection of colonic polyps by multiple AI-based systems. With the advent of better AI methodology, the focus has shifted from mere detection to accurate discrimination and diagnosis of colonic polyps. These systems, once validated, could usher in a new era in Colorectal Cancer (CRC) prevention programs which would center around "Leave in-situ" and "Resect and discard" strategies. These new strategies hinge around the specificity and accuracy of AI based systems in correctly identifying the pathological diagnosis of the polyps, thereby providing the endoscopist with real-time information in order to make a clinical decision of either leaving the lesion in-situ (mucosal polyps) or resecting and discarding the polyp (hyperplastic polyps). The major advantage of employing these strategies would be in cost optimization of CRC prevention programs while ensuring good clinical outcomes. The adoption of these AI-based systems in the national cancer prevention program of India in accordance with the mandate to increase technology integration could prove to be cost-effective and enable implementation of CRC prevention programs at the population level. This level of penetration could potentially reduce the incidence of CRC and improve patient survival by enabling early diagnosis and treatment. In this review, we will highlight key advancements made in the field of AI in the identification of polyps during colonoscopy and explore the role of AI based systems in cost optimization during the universal implementation of CRC prevention programs in the context of mid-income countries like India.

Out-of-pocket costs in gastrointestinal cancer patients: Lack of a perfectly framed problem contributing to financial toxicity

Fighting cancer is an economically expensive challenge for both health care payers, and the patients and their families and the median costs for cancer care are rapidly increasing in the last decade. Although both direct and indirect costs of medical assistance have been a frequent source of distress and contention, however analysis of the non-medical expenses incurred directly by cancer patients has not received adequate attention. Developing a deeper understanding of so-called "out-of-pocket" costs may be necessary. Out-of-pocket costs for medical care range from 7 % to 11 % of medical costs for all payers. However, the range of out-of-pocket costs shows considerable variability in different studies. In this review, we reviewed available data concerning direct and indirect medical costs, including psychosocial ones.

Use of Machine Learning and Statistical Algorithms to Predict Hospital Length of Stay Following Colorectal Cancer Resection: A South African Pilot Study

The aim of this pilot study was to develop logistic regression (LR) and support vector machine (SVM) models that differentiate low from high risk for prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS) in a South African cohort of 383 colorectal cancer patients who underwent surgical resection with curative intent. Additionally, the impact of 10-fold cross-validation (CV), Monte Carlo CV, and bootstrap internal validation methods on the performance of the two models was evaluated. The median LOS was 9 days, and prolonged LOS was defined as greater than 9 days post-operation. Preoperative factors associated with prolonged LOS were a prior history of hypertension and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score between 2 and 4. Postoperative factors related to prolonged LOS were the need for a stoma as part of the surgical procedure and the development of post-surgical complications. The risk of prolonged LOS was higher in male patients and in any patient with lower preoperative hemoglobin. The highest area under the receiving operating characteristics (AU-ROC) was achieved using LR of 0.823 (CI = 0.798–0.849) and SVM of 0.821 (CI = 0.776–0.825), with each model using the Monte Carlo CV method for internal validation. However, bootstrapping resulted in models with slightly lower variability. We found no significant difference between the models across the three internal validation methods. The LR and SVM algorithms used in this study required incorporating important features for optimal hospital LOS predictions. The factors identified in this study, especially postoperative complications, can be employed as a simple and quick test clinicians may flag a patient at risk of prolonged LOS.

An evidence mapping of systematic reviews and meta-analysis on traditional Chinese medicine for ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has been a proposed treatment option for ulcerative colitis (UC), however it has been difficult to understand the breadth and depth of evidence as various Chinese medicine therapies may produce effects differently. The aim of this evidence mapping is to visually understand the available evidence in the use of TCM in the treatment of UC, and to identify gaps in evidence to inform priorities of future research.

METHODS

A systematic electronic literature search of six databases were performed to identify systematic reviews (SRs) on different Chinese medicine therapies in the treatment in UC. Methodological quality of the included SRs was assessed using AMSTAR 2.

RESULTS

The mapping was based on 73 SRs, which included nine interventions that met eligibility criteria. The quality of the included SRs was very low. The diseases stages of patients with UC varied greatly, from active to remission, to non-acute outbreak, to not reported. The results mostly favored the method of intervention. Oral administration combined with enema was the most widely used route of administration in secondary research.

CONCLUSION

Based on the current evidence, the treatment of UC with TCM can only be recommended cautiously. A majority of included SRs did not report the location of the disease, the disease classification, and the route of administration of the intervention. Further research is needed on the effectiveness of Chinese medicine alone in the treatment of UC. The effectiveness of combined Chinese and conventional medicine combined with different routes of administration cannot be confirmed. Attention should be paid to the methodological quality of the systematic review. Unifies the outcome indicators used in the evaluation of effectiveness.

Cannabinoid Effects on Experimental Colorectal Cancer Models Reduce Aberrant Crypt Foci (ACF) and Tumor Volume: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer represents a heavy burden for health systems worldwide, being the third most common cancer worldwide. Despite the breakthroughs in medicine, current chemotherapeutic options continue to have important side effects and may not be effective in preventing disease progression. Cannabinoids might be substances with possible therapeutic potential for cancer because they can attenuate the side effects of chemotherapy and have antiproliferative and antimetastatic effects. We aim to determine, through a systematic review of experimental studies performed on animal CRC models, if cannabinoids can reduce the formation of preneoplastic lesions (aberrant crypt foci), number, and volume of neoplastic lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic, qualitative review of the literature was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases were searched. We use the following Medical Subject Headings (MESH) terms in PubMed: "colorectal neoplasms," "colonic neoplasms," "colorectal cancer," "polyps," "rimonabant," "cannabidiol," "cannabinoids," "azoxymethane," "xenograft," and "mice." Only studies that met the eligibility criteria were included.

RESULTS

Eight in vivo experimental studies were included in the analysis after the full-text evaluation. Seven studies were azoxymethane (AOM) colorectal cancer models, and four studies were xenograft models. Cannabidiol botanical substance (CBD BS) and rimonabant achieved high aberrant crypt foci (ACF) reduction (86% and 75.4%, respectively). Cannabigerol, O-1602, and URB-602 demonstrated a high capacity for tumor volume reduction. Induction of apoptosis, interaction with cell survival, growth pathways, and angiogenesis inhibition were the mechanisms extracted from the studies that explain cannabinoids' actions on CRC.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoids have incredible potential as antineoplastic agents as experimental models demonstrate that they can reduce tumor volume and ACF formation. It is crucial to conduct more experimental studies to understand the pharmacology of cannabinoids in CRC better.

Assessment of Cancer Care Costs in Disease-Specific Cancer Care Pathways

In view of an efficient use of the Italian National Health Service-funded healthcare resources, a novel data-processing strategy combining information from multiple sources was developed in a regional cancer network of northern Italy. The goal was to calculate the annual overall cost of care pathways of six disease groups in 10,486 patients. The evaluation was conceived as a population-based cost description from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. Costs occurred during a defined time period for a cross-section of patients at varying stages of their disease were measured. The total cancer care cost was €81,170,121 (11.1% of total local health expenditure), with a cost per patient of €7741.17 and a cost per capita of €204.62. Surgical, inpatient and day-hospital medical admissions, radiotherapy, drugs, outpatient care, emergency admissions, and home and hospice care accounted for 21.2%, 24.1%, 6.2%, 28.2%, 14.0%, 0.9%, and 5.4% of the total cost, respectively. The highest cost items included drugs (cost per capita, €22.95; 11.2% of total cost) and medical admissions (€14.51; 7.1%) for blood cancer, and surgical (€14.56; 7.1%) and medical admissions (€13.60; 6.6%) for gastrointestinal cancer. The information extracted allows multidisciplinary cancer care teams to be more aware of the costs of their clinical decisions.

Cost-utility analysis of 5-fluorouracil and capecitabine for adjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer

Background

Adjuvant chemotherapy at concurrent time with radiation therapy (RT) or at adjuvant time alone in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is used with several regimens. The cost-utility analysis was conducted to compare administration of two 5-FU regimens and capecitabine in the aspect of provider and societal viewpoint.

Methods

Stage II or III rectal cancer patients who received pre-operative or post-operative concurrent chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were compared by using decision tree model between (I) 5-FU plus leucovorin (LV) for 5 days per cycle (Mayo Clinic regimen); (II) 5-FU continuous infusion (CI) for 120-h per cycle (CAO/ARO/AIO-94 protocol); (III) standard regimen of capecitabine. All probability data were extracted from landmark study. Direct medical costs were the cost from database of Drug Medical Supply Information Center, while direct non-medical cost and utility were interviewed from stage II and III rectal cancer patients. The time horizon of this study was 5 years. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was the final result in this study, which determined as the numerator of the difference of costs among three drug regimens, and the difference of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from each drug was the denominator.

Results

5-FU plus LV was the cheapest and least efficacy for adjuvant treatment of LARC in both provider and societal viewpoint. In provider viewpoint, the ICERs of 5-FU CI and capecitabine were 334,550 THB/QALY (US $9,840/QALY) and 189,935 THB/QALY (US $5,586/QALY), respectively, with the corresponding societal viewpoint of 264,447 THB/QALY (US $7,778/QALY) and 119,120 THB/QALY (US $3,504/QALY) when 5-FU plus LV was used as comparator. The most influential parameter for value of treatment was acquisition cost of capecitabine. At the willingness to pay for one QALY gained in Thailand (160,000 THB or US $4,706), 5-FU plus LV, 5-FU CI and capecitabine had probabilities of cost-effectiveness of 63%, 2% and 35%, respectively.

Conclusions

Capecitabine was the most expensive regimen but produced the higher effectiveness than 5-FU plus LV and 5-FU CI. The most influential parameter in the model was acquisition cost of capecitabine.

Cost-effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Treatment Methods: Mapping of Systematic Reviews

OBJECTIVE

Due to extensive literature on colorectal cancer and their heterogeneous results, this study aimed to summarize the systematic reviews which review the cost-effectiveness studies on different aspects of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

The required data were collected by searching the following key words according to MeSH: "colorectal cancer," "colorectal oncology," "colorectal carcinoma," "colorectal neoplasm," "colorectal tumors," "cost-effectiveness," "systematic review," and "meta-analysis." The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Two reviewers evaluated the articles according to the checklist of "assessment of multiple systematic reviews" (AMSTAR) tool.

RESULTS

Finally, eight systematic reviews were included in the study. The Drummond checklist was mostly used for assessing the quality of the articles. The main perspective was related to the payer and the least was relevant to the social. The majority of the cases referred to sensitivity analysis (in 76% of the cases) and the lowest point also was allocated to discounting (in 37% of cases). The Markov model was used most widely in the studies. Treatment methods examined in the studies were not cost-effective in comparison with the studied units. Among the screening methods, computerized tomographic colonography and fecal DNA were cost-effective. The average score of the articles' qualities was high (9.8 out of 11).

CONCLUSIONS

The community perspective should be taken into consideration at large in the studies. It is necessary to pay more attention to discounting subject in studies. More frequent application of the Markov model is recommended.

Long-term costs of colorectal cancer treatment in Spain

BACKGROUND

Assessing the long-term cost of colorectal cancer (CRC) increases our understanding of the disease burden. The aim of this paper is to estimate the long-term costs of CRC care by stage at diagnosis and phase of care in the Spanish National Health Service.

METHODS

Retrospective study on resource use and direct medical cost of a cohort of 699 patients diagnosed and treated for CRC in 2000-2006, with follow-up until 30 June 2011, at Hospital del Mar (Barcelona). The Kaplan-Meier sample average estimator was used to calculate observed 11-year costs, which were then extrapolated to 16 years. Bootstrap percentile confidence intervals were calculated for the mean long-term cost per patient by stage. Phase-specific, long-term costs for the entire CRC cohort were also estimated.

RESULTS

With regard to stage at diagnosis, the mean long-term cost per patient ranged from €20,708 (in situ) to €47,681 (stage III). The estimated costs increased at more advanced stages up to stage III and then substantially decreased in stage IV. In terms of treatment phase, the mean cost of the initial period represented 24.8 % of the total mean long-term cost, whereas the cost of continuing and advanced care phases represented 16.9 and 58.3 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to provide long-term cost estimates for CRC treatment, by stage at diagnosis and phase of care, based on data from clinical practice in Spain, and it will contribute useful information for future studies on cost-effectiveness and budget impact of different therapeutic innovations in Spain.

Population-based trends in systemic therapy use and cost for cancer patients in the last year of life

BACKGROUND

The use of systemic therapy near the end of life can expose cancer patients to severe toxicity for minimal survival gain and comes with a high cost. Early palliative care is recommended, but there is evidence that aggressive care remains common. To better understand those patterns, the present study set out to describe trends in systemic therapy use and cost for cancer patients in the last year of life.

METHODS

Using the BC Cancer Registry, a retrospective population-based cohort of cancer decedents (2002-2007) was identified and linked to systemic therapy records. The outcomes of interest were any systemic therapy use and total systemic therapy costs during the last year of life. Multiple logistic regression (systemic therapy use) and generalized linear regression (costs) were conducted, adjusting for age, sex, and survival. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with primary colorectal, lung, prostate, or breast cancer.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2007, use of systemic therapy in the last 12-4 months of life increased by 21% (95% ci: 10% to 33%); no significant change in use in the last 3 months of life was observed. Costs for both periods increased over time, by 48% (95% ci: 36% to 63%) and by 33% (95% ci: 19% to 49%) respectively. The trends varied across cancer sites, with the greatest increases being observed for lung and colorectal cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use and costs of systemic therapy have generally been increasing, putting pressure on health care providers and payers, but the quality-of-life implications for patients must be better understood.

A cost-utility analysis of NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Protocol 218: incorporating prospectively collected quality-of-life scores in an economic model of treatment of ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

To estimate quality-of-life (QOL)-adjusted cost-utility with addition of bevacizumab (B) to intravenous paclitaxel/carboplatin (PC) for primary treatment of advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer.

METHODS

A modified Markov state transition model of 3 regimens evaluated in GOG 218 (PC, PC+concurrent B [PCB], and PCB+maintenance B [PCB+B]) was populated by prospectively collected survival, adverse event, and QOL data from GOG 218. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were modeled using primary event data. Costs of grade 4 hypertension, grade 3-5 bowel events, and growth factor support were incorporated. QOL scores were converted to utilities and incorporated into the model. Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to account for uncertainty in estimates.

RESULTS

PC was the least expensive ($4044) and least effective (mean 1.1 quality-adjusted progression-free years [QA-PFY]) regimen. PCB ($43,703 and 1.13 QA-PFY) was dominated by a combination of PC and PCB+B. PCB+B ($122,700 and 1.25 QA-PFY) was the most expensive regimen with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $792,380/QA-PFY compared to PC. In a model not incorporating QOL, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PCB+B was $632,571/PFY compared to PC.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cost-utility model, incorporation of QOL into an analysis of GOG 218 led to less favorable ICER (by >$150,000/QA-PFY) in regimens containing B compared with those that do not include B. Continued investigation of populations with ovarian cancer in whom the efficacy of treatment with bevacizumab is expected to be increased (or in whom QOL is expected to increase with use) is critical.

Economic studies in colorectal cancer: challenges in measuring and comparing costs

Estimates of the costs associated with cancer care are essential both for assessing burden of disease at the population level and for conducting economic evaluations of interventions to prevent, detect, or treat cancer. Comparisons of cancer costs between health systems and across countries can improve understanding of the economic consequences of different health-care policies and programs. We conducted a structured review of the published literature on colorectal cancer (CRC) costs, including direct medical, direct nonmedical (ie, patient and caregiver time, travel), and productivity losses. We used MEDLINE to identify English language articles published between 2000 and 2010 and found 55 studies. The majority were conducted in the United States (52.7%), followed by France (12.7%), Canada (10.9%), the United Kingdom (9.1%), and other countries (9.1%). Almost 90% of studies estimated direct medical costs, but few studies estimated patient or caregiver time costs or productivity losses associated with CRC. Within a country, we found significant heterogeneity across the studies in populations examined, health-care delivery settings, methods for identifying incident and prevalent patients, types of medical services included, and analyses. Consequently, findings from studies with seemingly the same objective (eg, costs of chemotherapy in year following CRC diagnosis) are difficult to compare. Across countries, aggregate and patient-level estimates vary in so many respects that they are almost impossible to compare. Our findings suggest that valid cost comparisons should be based on studies with explicit standardization of populations, services, measures of costs, and methods with the goal of comparability within or between health systems or countries. Expected increases in CRC prevalence and costs in the future highlight the importance of such studies for informing health-care policy and program planning.

Cost analysis of S1 and XELOX as adjuvant therapy for gastric cancer

Both S1 and XELOX (capecitabine+oxaliplatin) have been recommended as an adjuvant treatment for gastric cancer according to the guidelines of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). This study compared the two regimens in terms of monetary costs, assuming equal efficacy of both regimens. Chemotherapy cost data of 188 patients were collected from the medical records, 91 for the S1 group and 97 for XELOX. Costs were classified as direct costs (chemotherapy, hospitalization, venous access, and tests), adverse event-related treatments costs, and societal (travel and time) costs. The total direct costs of S1 and XELOX per cycle per patient were $1938±236 and $2317±315, respectively. S1 cost $27 and $9 less than XELOX on total adverse event-related costs and societal costs, respectively. The total costs of S1 and XELOX were $1994±322 versus $2410±391 per cycle per patient, respectively. The total cost of S1 was 17.3% less than that of XELOX for the average patient. All the differences were statistically significant. S1, compared with XELOX, could be a more affordable option as an adjuvant treatment for gastric cancer when all healthcare resources are taken into account in China.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab-irinotecan-fluorouracil versus irinotecan-fluorouracil in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the addition of bevacizumab to the irinotecan-fluorouracil (Douillard regimen-CPT-FUFA-) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in a single-institution population.

METHODS

Controlled, nonrandomized retrospective observational study. Treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer patients received CPT-FUFA (January 2000-December 2003; control group) and bevacizumab_CPT-FUFA (January 2007-December 2010; study group). Variables related to: patient, clinical response (number of disease progression or death events, progression-free survival) and treatment (antineoplastic dose reduction, incremental cost/treated patient associated with the addition of bevacizumab).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

median progression-free survival (Kaplan-Meier method), and hazard ratio (Cox regression). Survival curves were compared (Mantel-Haenszel test).

RESULTS

In all, 69 patients were included: 32 (57.2 years -95%CI: 54.0-60.5-, 65.6% men) in CPT-FUFA group and 37 (68.1 years - 95%CI: 65.5-70.7-, 78.4% men) in bevacizumab_CPT-FUFA group. The disease progression or death events were 29 (90.6%) in CPT-FUFA group and 34 (91.9%) in bevacizumab_CPT-FUFA group. Median progression-free survival was 10.1 months (95%CI: 7.1-12.2) in CPT-FUFA and 11.0 months (95%CI: 7.6-12.6) in bevacizumab_CPT-FUFA (hazard ratio = 1.22; 95%CI: 0.7-2.1). Dose reductions: irinotecan and fluorouracil 11% (range: 4-20) in 5/32 (15.6%) CPT-FUFA patients and 25% (range: 8-35) in 18/37 (48.6%) bevacizumab_CPT-FUFA patients; Bevacizumab 30% (range: 4-50) in 20/37 (54.1%) bevacizumab_CPT-FUFA patients. The incremental cost associated with the addition of bevacizumab was 12,696.5 (IC95%:10,860.8-14,532.1) euros/patient.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bevacizumab to the irinotecan-fluorouracil regimen, does not improve progression-free survival in our study population but increases costs per treated patient. These results potentially compromise the cost-effectiveness of the Bevacizumab_CPT-FUFA regimen.

Palliative treatment of colorectal cancer in Germany: cost of care and quality of life

INTRODUCTION

To estimate the costs of palliative care for colorectal cancer (CRC) from the perspective of German statutory health insurance and to measure the patients' quality of life (QoL) for a 2-year time period.

METHODS

A prospective observational multicentre study was carried out to estimate the direct costs of care over a 2-year period. Case report forms, medical records, and claims data were all applied to document medical and resource usage data in real-world settings. QoL was measured by using the Short Form-12 Health Survey.

RESULTS

In total 101 patients (mean age 67.09 ± 11.13 years, 68 % male) from 12 different settings were included. The mean costs per patient during the 1st and 2nd years were calculated to be 42,361€ and 32,023€, respectively. Highest mean costs were calculated for the second quarter, which reached an amount of 12,900€ (95 % CI: 11,127€-14,673€). Mean physical summary scores and mean mental summary scores were 41.8 and 49.7, respectively.

DISCUSSION

This is the first study assessing the costs of palliative care and the quality of life of patients with CRC in real-world health-care delivery in Germany. It could be shown that CRC treatment represents an enormous economic burden to the German health-care system. Increased efforts in promoting effective and efficient treatment options, or performance-based medication reimbursement schemes, might be helpful in reducing the costs.

Cost analysis of adjuvant therapy with XELOX or FOLFOX4 for colon cancer

AIM

XELOX and FOLFOX4 have both been recommended as adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer. This study compared the two regimens in terms of monetary costs, assuming equal efficacy of the therapies.

METHOD

A retrospective financial audit was conducted of the medical records of patients treated with XELOX or FOLFOX4. All itemized expenses were classified as direct (chemotherapy, hospitalization, venous access and tests), related to adverse effects due to the adjuvant therapy, or societal (travel and time costs). The cost of supportive care was not included.

RESULTS

XELOX involved less total cost to the patient than FOLFOX4 (a difference of US$2857.68), fewer costs related to adverse effects ($668.97), and less travel ($26.07) and time ($390.93) expenditure per patient.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that, overall, XELOX is a more affordable option than FOLFOX4 in China.

Cost of care for colorectal cancer in Ireland: a health care payer perspective

OBJECTIVE

Management options for colorectal cancer have expanded in recent years. We estimated average lifetime cost of care for colorectal cancer in Ireland in 2008, from the health care payer perspective.

METHOD

A decision tree model was developed in Microsoft EXCEL. Site and stage-specific treatment pathways were constructed from guidelines and validated by expert clinical opinion. Health care resource use associated with diagnosis, treatment and follow-up were obtained from the National Cancer Registry Ireland (n=1,498 cancers diagnosed during 2004-2005) and three local hospital databases (n=155, 142 and 46 cases diagnosed in 2007). Unit costs for hospitalisation, procedures, laboratory tests and radiotherapy were derived from DRG costs, hospital finance departments, clinical opinion and literature review. Chemotherapy costs were estimated from local hospital protocols, pharmacy departments and clinical opinion. Uncertainty was explored using one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

In 2008, the average (stage weighted) lifetime cost of managing a case of colorectal cancer was €39,607. Average costs were 16% higher for rectal (€43,502) than colon cancer (€37,417). Stage I disease was the least costly (€23,688) and stage III most costly (€48,835). Diagnostic work-up and follow-up investigations accounted for 4 and 5% of total costs, respectively. Cost estimates were most sensitive to recurrence rates and prescribing of biological agents.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the value of using existing data from national and local databases in contributing to estimating the cost of managing cancer. The findings illustrate the impact of biological agents on costs of cancer care and the potential of strategies promoting earlier diagnosis to reduce health care resource utilisation and care costs.

Clinical and cost effectiveness of bevacizumab + FOLFIRI combination versus FOLFIRI alone as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in South Korea

BACKGROUND

Bevacizumab has been extensively investigated in combination with various standard chemotherapies in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, a comparison to irinotecan + infusional 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To explore clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding bevacizumab to a regimen of FOLFIRI for the first-line treatment of mCRC in the Republic of Korea by conducting an indirect treatment comparison.

METHODS

A health-economic model was developed to investigate the possible health outcomes (life-years gained [LYG]), direct costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of adding bevacizumab to a FOLFIRI regimen. Data on progression-free and overall survival were derived from randomized clinical trials and were used in the indirect treatment comparison. The annual discount rate for costs and outcomes was 5%. A lifetime horizon of 8 years was used. Sensitivity analyses were carried out on all pivotal model assumptions.

RESULTS

Incremental mean overall survival among patients treated with bevacizumab + FOLFIRI varied between 8.6 and 15.7 months compared with patients treated with FOLFIRI alone. The deterministic base-case result was 1.177 LYG. The discounted ICERs ranged from μ31.8 to μ39.5 million/LYG, with the base-case result being μ34.5 million/LYG. Treatment effect had the most impact on the outcomes in this model.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is no formal threshold for ICER per LYG in Korea, funding may be considered for bevacizumab + FOLFIRI, particularly if the severity and end-of-life nature of mCRC is taken into account.

The current state of targeted agents in rectal cancer

Targeted biologic agents have an established role in treating metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), and the integration of targeted therapies into the treatment of CRC has resulted in significant improvements in outcomes. Rapidly growing insight into the molecular biology of CRC, as well as recent developments in gene sequencing and molecular diagnostics, has led to high expectations for the identification of molecular markers to be used in personalized treatment regimens. The mechanisms of action and toxicities of targeted therapies differ from those of traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy. Targeted therapy has raised new insight about the possibility of tailoring treatment to an individual's disease, the assessment of drug effectiveness and toxicity, and the economics of cancer care. This paper covers the last decade of clinical trials that have explored the toxicity and efficacy of targeted agents in locally advanced and metastatic CRC and how their role may benefit patients with rectal cancer. Future efforts should include prospective studies of these agents in biomarker-defined subpopulations, as well as studies of novel agents that target angiogenesis, tumor-stromal interaction, and the cell signaling pathways implicated in rectal cancer.

The economic pressures for biosimilar drug use in cancer medicine

The main rationale for using biosimilar drugs is for cost saving. The market development for biosimilar drugs will therefore depend on the degree to which cost saving measures are required by nations, medical insurers and individuals and the absolute savings that could be gained by switching from original drugs. This paper is designed to discover the degree to which financial constraints will drive future health spending and to discover if legal or safety issues could impact on any trend. A structured literature search was performed for papers and documents to 27 August 2011. Where multiple sources of data were available on a topic, data from papers and reports by multinational or national bodies were used in preference to data from regions or individual hospitals. Almost all health systems face current significant cost pressures. The twin driver of increasing cancer prevalence as populations age and cancer medicine costs rising faster than inflation places oncology as the most significant single cost problem. For some countries, this is predicted to make medicine unaffordable within a decade. Most developed countries have planned to embrace biosimilar use as a cost-control measure. Biosimilar introduction into the EU has already forced prices down, both the price of biosimilar drugs and competitive price reductions in originator drugs. Compound annual growth rates of use have been predicted at 65.8% per year. Most developed countries have planned to embrace biosimilar use as a major cost-control measure. Only legal blocks and safety concerns are likely to act against this trend. For centralised healthcare systems, and those with a strong tradition of generic medicine use, biosimilar use will clearly rise with predictions of more than 80% of prescriptions of some biologic drugs within 1 year of market entry in the USA. Delaying the implementation of such programmes however risks a real crisis in healthcare delivery for many countries and hospitals that few can now afford.

Cetuximab in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Cetuximab is a chimeric mAb with avidity for the EGFR higher than that of the natural ligands of the receptor. Preclinical studies showed that cetuximab demonstrated synergy with topoisomerase I inhibitors in the treatment of human colorectal cancer (CRC) cell lines in vivo. Subsequent clinical trials have shown that cetuximab can reverse resistance to topoisomerase I inhibitors in addition to having modest monotherapy activity. These studies led to accelerated provisional FDA approval of the drug for the treatment of patients with irinotecan-refractory metastatic CRC. Its clinical utility has been improved with the discovery of negative predictive biomarkers; these have shown that there is a lack of cetuximab benefit for patients whose tumors generally harbor a KRAS mutation, thus sparing these patients the toxicity of the agent which would not be of treatment benefit.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers the last decade of clinical trials that have determined the toxicity and efficacy of cetuximab when given to patients with CRC, as well as some of the molecular subgroups tumors from patients with CRC who appear to not derive benefit from this mAb.

EXPERT OPINION

Cetuximab has modest single-agent efficacy in the treatment of patients with metastatic CRC whose tumors do not harbor a KRAS mutation. In combination with irinotecan, it is associated with an overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) advantage in first-line therapy in patients with KRAS non mutant metastatic CRC; it can be combined with irinotecan to overcome resistance in patients with KRAS non mutant CRC who have previously progressed on prior irinotecan chemotherapy. Future studies of putative biomarkers are likely to give additional information to clearly define which patients with metastatic CRC receive therapeutic benefit from cetuximab and other monoclonal anti-EGFR therapies.

At What Cost Does a Potential Survival Advantage of Bevacizumab Make Sense for the Primary Treatment of Ovarian Cancer? A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Purpose

To determine whether the addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel and carboplatin for the primary treatment of advanced ovarian cancer can be cost effective.

Methods

A cost-effectiveness analysis compared the three arms of the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) 218 study (paclitaxel plus carboplatin [PC], PC plus bevacizumab [PCB], and PCB plus bevacizumab maintenance [PCB+B]). Actual and estimated costs of treatment plus the potential costs of complications were established for each strategy. Progression-free survival (PFS) and bowel perforation rates were taken from recently reported results of GOG 218. Sensitivity analysis was performed for pertinent uncertainties in the model. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per progression-free life-year saved (PF-LYS) were estimated.

Results

For the 600 patients entered onto each arm of GOG 218 at the baseline estimates of PFS and bowel perforation, the cost of PC was $2.5 million, compared with $21.4 million for PCB and $78.3 million for PCB+B. These costs led to an ICER of $479,712 per PF-LYS for PCB and $401,088 per PF-LYS for PCB+B. When the cost of bevacizumab was reduced to 25% of baseline, the ICER of PCB+B fell below $100,000 per PF-LYS. ICERs were not substantially reduced when the perforation rate was equal across all arms.

Conclusion

The addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy in patients with advanced ovarian cancer is not cost effective. Treatment with maintenance bevacizumab leads to improved PFS but is associated with both direct and indirect costs. The cost effectiveness of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of ovarian cancer is primarily dependent on drug costs.

A comparison of mortality and costs associated with FOLFOX versus FOLFIRI in stage IV colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To examine cost and mortality among stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) patients treated with 5-fluorouracil (5FU)/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or 5FU/leucovorin/irinotecan (FOLFIRI).

METHODS

Adult CRC patients newly treated with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI were identified from a large database using medical and pharmacy claims for services delivered January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2005. Cancer stage for a subset of patients was abstracted from medical records. Outcomes were annualized costs calculated for 4 years of observation, and deaths as recorded by the National Death Index. Cost was analyzed using generalized linear modeling; mortality was modeled using Cox proportional hazards analysis.

RESULTS

Unadjusted annualized median and mean costs were $134,401 and $152,213, respectively, for the FOLFOX cohort (n = 41) and $103,150 and $107,994 for the FOLFIRI cohort (n = 86). Death occurred among five (12%) FOLFOX and 42 (53%) FOLFIRI patients. Adjusted analysis revealed no significant difference in cost between cohorts, even after adjusting for reduced irinotecan costs due to generic availability. Incremental costs associated with one additional life saved per year were only $1,236 higher for patients treated with FOLFOX compared with FOLFIRI. Cox analysis revealed a significant survival advantage for FOLFOX over FOLFIRI (HR = 5.2; 95% CI: 1.7-15.8).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant survival benefit was seen for CRC patients receiving FOLFOX versus FOLFIRI; multivariate analysis revealed no significant cost differences. However, the small sample size may have resulted in lack of adequate power to detect a difference between cohorts. There may be factors influencing mortality that were not included in the multivariate modeling.

Cost analysis of capecitabine vs 5-fluorouracil-based treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer patients

The aim was to evaluate the cost of capecitabine vs conventional combination chemotherapics such as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Italy. The study was a multicenter, retrospective longitudinal treatment-cost analysis. Patients older than 18 years, diagnosis of mCRC and at least 3 completed cycles of chemotherapy with oral capecitabine or 5-FU also in association with other chemotherapic agents were enrolled. Direct healthcare resources attributable to mCRC treatment were quantified using 2007 prices and tariffs. The analysis was conducted from the National Health Service perspective with a 6-month time horizon. A total of 231 patients affected by mCRC (55% males; mean age 63.7+/-10.31 yrs) were studied. Total direct costs per patient per month in capecitabine and 5-FU groups were euro1,001.66 +/- euro434.93 and euro3,172.81 +/- euro1,232.37 respectively (p<0.0001). Oral capecitabine therapy cost the health service less than intravenous therapies.

Economic evaluation of capecitabine as adjuvant or metastatic therapy in colorectal cancer

Capecitabine, an oral prodrug of 5-fluorouracil, is indicated for adjuvant treatment in patients with Dukes' C colon cancer and for subsequent lines in metastatic colorectal cancer. The aim of this article is to review the literature on the economics of capecitabine for the treatment of colon cancer. A systematic review was conducted to search for articles published from January 2003 to December 2009 that met the inclusion criteria. For abstracts that were considered acceptable, full-text articles were then reviewed. Of the 42 potential studies that were identified, 13 original studies (16 publications) met the inclusion criteria. To date, the economic evaluation literature has consistently projected or found that capecitabine is not only a cost-effective treatment for adjuvant or for metastatic colorectal cancer (i.e., providing good value for money) but, furthermore, would actually be cost saving in the majority of country settings.

Clinical and economic evaluation of first-line therapy with FOLFIRI or modified FOLFOX6 for metastatic colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Recently, significant progress in treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer has been achieved. Either FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan) or modified FOLFOX6 (fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin, oxaliplatin dose 85 mg/m(2)) is selected as first-line therapy in clinical practice in Japan. However, economic burden of colorectal cancer is considerable.

METHODS

Analysis was made for all patients who were treated with FOLFIRI or modified FOLFOX6 for metastatic colorectal cancer. Regimen of FOLFIRI was compared with modified FOLFOX6 under consideration from clinical and economic standpoints. Progression free survival, response, toxicity and cancer care cost in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer was analyzed. Direct costs based on the fee schedule of the Japanese national health insurance were calculated.

RESULTS

Median progression free survival was 7.7 months for FOLFIRI versus 8.4 months for modified FOLFOX6 (P = 0.48). Overall cost for first four cycles was yen756 284 for FOLFIRI and yen1 081 162 for modified FOLFOX6 (P < 0.0001). All grade alopecia was significantly more frequent with FOLFIRI than with modified FOLFOX6 (P = 0.04). All grade neuropathy was more observed with modified FOLFOX6 than FOLFIRI (P = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

FOLFIRI is inexpensive in the initial stage of treatment which a number of patients can receive chemotherapy than modified FOLFOX6 as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer in Japanese national insurance system.

Pharmacoeconomic Aspects of FOLFIRI or FOLFOX Regimens Administered with a Fully Ambulatory Pump Compared to the Day Hospital Setting

Aims and background

The social cost of management of patients suffering from colorectal cancer has been growing dramatically in the last decade due to the high number of active antitumor agents and to the increased incidence of the tumor in western countries. The aim of the study was to explore from a pharmacoeconomic point of view a different way to administer the two most common regimens in this patient setting.

Study design

This was a cost-minimization study. Data were extracted from hospital registries and dedicated offices. The traditional setting (day hospital inpatient setting) and a fully ambulatory setting (CIP™ pump) were considered and compared.

Results

The CIP™ system resulted in higher direct costs than the day hospital setting (444.70 vs 159.00 euro/cycle). However, traditional infusion resulted in longer nursing care, with an increase in nursing costs of more than 100.00 euro/cycle. Moreover, the inpatient setting obliged patients to stay in the hospital as much as ten times longer than with the CIP™ system. This meant that with the same time span and the same resources, the CIP™ pump permitted treatment of at least five times more patients than the traditional setting. Thus, a threshold of 52.00 euro per patient for general hospital costs (ordinary and extraordinary maintenance of buildings, power supply, and housekeeping) was identified to discriminate whether the CIP™ pump is cost-saving or not.

Conclusions

Administration of the FOLFIRI or FOLFOX regimen in a traditional day hospital setting was less costly when considering the direct costs. However, a fully ambulatory pump permitted to better employ hospital resources and could permit cost-saving in those units in which more than five patients per day are treated and global costs are higher than 52.00 euro per patient.

The evolving role of monoclonal antibodies in colorectal cancer: early presumptions and impact on clinical trial development

Targeted biologic agents have an established role in treating metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Bevacizumab, a recombinant monoclonal antibody against the vascular endothelial growth factor ligand is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for bevacizumab-naïve patients. Cetuximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody (mAb) against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is FDA approved as a single agent, or in combination with irinotecan, in both irinotecan-naïve and refractory patients, and has additional efficacy in combination with oxaliplatin. Panitumumab, a fully human EGFR mAb, is FDA approved as a single agent in refractory patients but has additional efficacy in combination with chemotherapy. After reaching a temporary therapeutic plateau of FDA-approved agents for the treatment of mCRC, pivotal results have developed that critically affect the care for these patients. Correlative data from randomized trials of EGFR inhibitors across disease settings have demonstrated higher response rates, specifically for patients with wild-type K-RAS tumors. The interpretation of the B-RAF mutation and other molecular markers may further define the appropriateness of anti-EGFR therapy. Recent literature revealed that the first-line use of combined anti-EGFR therapy plus bevacizumab resulted in inferior outcomes and additional toxicities. Furthermore, the role of biologic agents for locally advanced colon cancer cannot be advocated at this time. With impending changes in the health care system, the economic impact of mAbs will continue to be scrutinized. Hence, as the significance of molecular markers continues to develop, their role as it pertains to the appropriate use of biologic agents in the treatment of mCRC will continue to evolve.

Costs associated with complications are lower with capecitabine than with 5-fluorouracil in patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Capecitabine, an oral alternative to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), has equal clinical efficacy and a favorable safety profile; however, its use may be limited because of unit cost concerns. In this study, the authors measured the cost of chemotherapy-related complications during treatment with capecitabine- and 5-FU-based regimens.

METHODS

Patients with CRC who received at least 1 administration of capecitabine or 5-FU during 2004 and 2005 were identified from the Thomson MarketScan research databases. Monthly frequency and cost for 23 complications were recorded. Logistic regression was used to predict complication probability. General linear models were used to predict monthly complication cost and total monthly expenditure.

RESULTS

In total, 4973 patients with CRC met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. Although the most frequently observed complications were the same between capecitabine and 5-FU (nausea and vomiting, infection, anemia, neutropenia, diarrhea), each was observed with greater frequency in 5-FU-based regimens. The mean predicted monthly complication cost was significantly higher (by 136%) with 5-FU monotherapy than with capecitabine monotherapy (difference, $601; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], $469-$737). In addition, the mean predicted monthly complication cost for 5-FU+oxaliplatin was higher than the cost with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (difference, $1165; 95% CI, $892-$1595). When acquisition, administration, and complication costs were taken into consideration, there were no significant differences in the total cost between capecitabine regimens and 5-FU regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Capecitabine compared well with 5-FU-based therapy in patients with CRC and was associated with lower complication rates and associated costs.

XELOX versus FOLFOX6 as an adjuvant treatment in colorectal cancer: an economic analysis

OBJECTIVES

An economic analysis (based on interim data from a long-term, randomised, multi-centre, controlled, clinical trial) to evaluate chemotherapy with XELOX (capecitabine/oxaliplatin) versus FOLFOX6 (5Fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin) as an adjuvant treatment for high risk colorectal cancer patients in Greece.

METHODS

As survival rate was the same in the two arms, a cost-minimisation analysis was carried out, from the perspectives of the National Health Service (NHS), Social Insurance Funds (SIF) and patients in Greece. Patient data were combined with 2008 unit prices to estimate the total cost of patient care, the patients' travelling expenditure and their productivity losses. Raw data were bootstrapped 5000 times in order to allow statistical testing.

RESULTS

From an NHS perspective, the mean chemotherapy cost was 8762 euro with FOLFOX6 and 9713 euro with XELOX; costs of administration and hospitalisations were 5154 euro and 1050 euro, respectively. Total treatment cost with FOLFOX6 reached 17,480 euro and with XELOX 12 525 euro, a difference of 4955 euro (p < 0.001) in favour of the latter therapy. From an SIF perspective, the total cost of treatment was 16,240 euro with FOLFOX6 and 12,617 euro with XELOX, a reduction of 3623 euro (p < 0.001) with the latter therapy. Mean patient travelling cost was 184 euro with FOLFOX6 and 80 euro with XELOX, a difference of 104 euro (p < 0.001). Mean productivity loss was 100 euro with FOLFOX6 and 31 euro with XELOX, a difference of 69 euro (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy combining oral capecitabine and oxaliplatin reduces total treatment cost for the Greek National Health Service and Social Insurance Funds, mainly through a reduction in the cost of administration. From patients' perspective, it reduces travelling expenditure and productivity losses. Therefore, this combination may be a cost-effective approach for the management of colorectal cancer patients who have had surgery in Greece. This is an analysis alongside a clinical trial, and should be interpreted in this specific context in which it was undertaken.

Clinical use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monoclonal antibodies in metastatic colorectal cancer

Abstract Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is the most potent proangiogenic factor and has been identified as an important target of cancer therapy. Blocking endothelial cell VEGF activity inhibits tumor angiogenesis; normalizes tumor vasculature, facilitating improved chemotherapy delivery; and prevents the recruitment of progenitor cells from the bone marrow. Bevacizumab, the only United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved anti-VEGF agent, is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits the binding of VEGF to VEGF receptors. The addition of bevacizumab to standard first- and second-line chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer improves overall and progression-free survival times and increases the time to disease progression. Studies are evaluating bevacizumab as adjuvant therapy. The optimal bevacizumab dosage is unknown, but 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks is currently recommended for initial therapy. A surrogate efficacy marker is needed to optimize bevacizumab use, both for dose and patient selection; the clinical applicability of several surrogate efficacy markers is being evaluated. Generally, bevacizumab is well tolerated; however, several serious adverse effects that may occur (e.g., hypertensive crisis) can usually be appropriately prevented or managed. Although current recommendations suggest the administration of the first bevacizumab dose over 90 minutes to prevent infusion-related hypersensitivity reactions, recent study results show that 5 and 10 mg/kg can safely be administered over 10 and 20 minutes, respectively. Whether the addition of bevacizumab to metastatic colorectal cancer treatment regimens is a cost-effective treatment option is unknown; health economic studies are needed. When used for FDA-approved indications or for off-label indications being evaluated in select clinical trials, Medicare reimburses for bevacizumab therapy.

Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy with uracil-tegafur for curatively resected stage III rectal cancer

Recently, the National Surgical Adjuvant Study of Colorectal Cancer in Japan, a randomised controlled trial of oral uracil-tegafur (UFT) adjuvant therapy for stage III rectal cancer, showed remarkable survival gains, compared with surgery alone. To evaluate value for money of adjuvant UFT therapy, cost-effective analysis was carried out. Cost-effectiveness analysis of adjuvant UFT therapy was carried out from a payer's perspective, compared with surgery alone. Overall survival and relapse-free survival were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, up to 5.6 years from randomisation. Costs were estimated from trial data during observation. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated using utility score from literature. Beyond observation period, they were simulated by the Boag model combined with the competing risk model. For 5.6-year observation, 10-year follow-up and over lifetime, adjuvant UFT therapy gained 0.50, 0.96 and 2.28 QALYs, and reduced costs by $2457, $1771 and $1843 per person compared with surgery alone, respectively (3% discount rate for both effect and costs). Cost-effectiveness acceptability and net monetary benefit analyses showed the robustness of these results. Economic evaluation of adjuvant UFT therapy showed that this therapy is cost saving and can be considered as a cost-effective treatment universally accepted for wide use in Japan.

Review article: current management of metastatic colorectal cancer - the evolving impact of targeted drug therapies

BACKGROUND

The field of colorectal cancer chemotherapy has been transformed by the advent of molecule-specific drugs. Combined use of such drugs enhances tumour response rates, but controlled data quantifying the relative efficacy and cost-effectiveness of different drug combinations on overall survival remain scarce.

AIM

To conduct an overview of published clinical trials in advanced colorectal cancer, with the objective of framing provisional approaches to current management.

METHODS

An NCBI/PubMed search was performed using the strings, 'colorectal cancer' ('metastatic' or 'advanced' or 'palliative') and ('chemotherapy' or 'drug therapy' or 'targeted' or 'target-specific' or 'molecularly-targeted').

RESULTS

Combinations of target-specific drugs (with or without the DNA-alkylating agent oxaliplatin) have substantially enhanced colorectal cancer time to progression over the last decade and have also expedited surgical resection of liver metastases. Disease-free survival, overall survival and quality of life are favourably influenced.

CONCLUSIONS

Target-specific drugs improve palliative efficacy in the setting of advanced colorectal cancer. However, key issues persist as to the cost-effectiveness of these newer drug treatments, and further controlled trials are needed to resolve this important debate.

A critical review of the full economic evaluations of pharmacological treatments for colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

This literature review makes a critical assessment of the methodology of the full economic evaluations (FEEs) conducted on colorectal cancer (CRC) pharmacological treatments.

METHOD

A literature search of the international databases PubMed and EMBASE was carried out to find all the studies published in the English language on pharmacological treatments for CRC in the period 2001-2005. A checklist was adopted to analyse the 13 FEEs selected. Fourteen clinical trials were extracted from the references as sources of efficacy data and were reviewed separately according to a clinical checklist. Finally, the reliability of the 13 FEEs was assessed from the health authorities' perspective by applying a critical appraisal checklist of 16 items derived from the economic and clinical variables previously analysed.

RESULTS

This review found that pharmacoeconomic studies on CRC showed important methodological weaknesses mainly regarding economic evaluation, whilst the sources of clinical evidence were of higher technical quality, although the clinical effectiveness of therapies was not fully sustained by their results.