IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Updated Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Trastuzumab for Early Breast Cancer: A UK Perspective Considering Duration of Benefit, Long-Term Toxicity and Pattern of Recurrence

  • Peter S. Hall

    (Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK; Section of Oncology and Clinical Research, Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK)

  • Claire Hulme

    (Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK)

  • Christopher McCabe

    (Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK)

  • Yemi Oluboyede

    (Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK)

  • Jeff Round

    (Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK)

  • David A. Cameron

    (Section of Oncology and Clinical Research, Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK; Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK)

Background: Trastuzumab has significantly improved survival outcomes for women with Human Epidermal growth factor Receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer. Trastuzumab was established as a cost-effective adjuvant treatment in 2006. We present an updated cost-effectiveness analysis from the UK perspective, which explores assumptions about the duration of benefit from treatment, pattern of metastatic recurrence and long-term cardiac toxicity. Objective: The objective of this study was to calculate, from the UK NHS perspective, expected costs (year 2008 values) and benefits over the lifetime of an average cohort of women with HER2-positive early breast cancer treated with or without 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab sequentially after chemotherapy. Methods: A cost-utility analysis was performed using a discrete-state time-dependent semi-Markov model. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to characterize uncertainty around expected outcomes. Value-of-information (VOI) analysis was used to identify areas of priority for further research. Results: The cost-effectiveness estimates were highly sensitive to the estimated duration of treatment benefit. Trastuzumab remained a cost-effective treatment strategy at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30 000 per QALY provided the duration of benefit was more than 3.6 years from treatment initiation, assuming the hazard ratio for disease-free survival was 0.63. An increasing proportion of brain metastases with trastuzumab produced a small change towards worse cost effectiveness. Long-term cardiac toxicity needed to rise to high levels to affect overall life expectancy and cost effectiveness. VOI analysis placed highest value on research into the duration of treatment benefit. The relationships between progression-free survival and overall survival and the costs of cancer recurrence were also important. Conclusion: The cost effectiveness of adjuvant trastuzumab remains uncertain and dependent on assumptions regarding its clinical effect. Uncertainty around cost effectiveness could be reduced by further research into the duration of treatment effect, particularly in subgroups where this may be shorter. Long-term follow-up is warranted and methods to accurately measure duration of treatment effect and late toxicities should be developed for future adjuvant drug studies.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://PharmacoEconomics.adisonline.com/pt/re/pec/pdfhandler.00019053-201129050-00006.pdf
Download Restriction: Pay per view

File URL: http://PharmacoEconomics.adisonline.com/pt/re/pec/fulltext.00019053-201129050-00006.htm
Download Restriction: Pay per view

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Springer Healthcare | Adis in its journal PharmacoEconomics.

Volume (Year): 29 (2011)
Issue (Month): 5 ()
Pages: 415-432

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:29:y:2011:i:5:p:415-432
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://pharmacoeconomics.adisonline.com/

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:29:y:2011:i:5:p:415-432. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dave Dustin)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.