美国既往接受过氟嘧啶、奥沙利铂和伊立替康化疗和生物制剂治疗的转移性结直肠癌患者接受系统疗法的不良事件成本。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of comparative effectiveness research Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-08 DOI:10.57264/cer-2024-0084
Victoria Federico Paly, Arvind Dasari, Joleen Hubbard, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Thihan Padukkavidana, Luis Hernandez
{"title":"美国既往接受过氟嘧啶、奥沙利铂和伊立替康化疗和生物制剂治疗的转移性结直肠癌患者接受系统疗法的不良事件成本。","authors":"Victoria Federico Paly, Arvind Dasari, Joleen Hubbard, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Thihan Padukkavidana, Luis Hernandez","doi":"10.57264/cer-2024-0084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> The objective of this study was to compare adverse event (AE) management costs for fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) and trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (T/T+bev) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy from the US commercial and Medicare payer perspectives. <b>Materials & methods:</b> A cost-consequence model was developed to calculate the per-patient and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) AE costs using rates of grade 3/4 AEs with incidence ≥5% in clinical trials, event-specific management costs and duration treatment. Anchored comparisons of AE costs were calculated using a difference-in-differences approach with best supportive care (BSC) as a common reference. AE rates and treatment duration were obtained from clinical trials: FRESCO and FRESCO-2 (fruquintinib), RECOURSE (T/T), CORRECT (regorafenib) and SUNLIGHT (T/T, T/T+bev). AE management costs for the commercial and Medicare perspectives were obtained from publicly available sources. <b>Results:</b> From the commercial perspective, the AE costs (presented as per-patient, PPPM) were: $4015, $1091 for fruquintinib (FRESCO); $4253, $1390 for fruquintinib (FRESCO-2); $17,110, $11,104 for T/T (RECOURSE); $9851, $4691 for T/T (SUNLIGHT); $8199, $4823 for regorafenib; and $11,620, $2324 for T/T+bev. These results were consistent in anchored comparisons: the difference-in-difference for fruquintinib based on FRESCO was -$1929 versus regorafenib and -$11,427 versus T/T; for fruquintinib based on FRESCO-2 was -$2257 versus regorafenib and -$11,756 versus T/T. Across all analyses, results were consistent from the Medicare perspective. <b>Conclusion:</b> Fruquintinib was associated with lower AE management costs compared with regorafenib, T/T and T/T+bev for patients with previously treated mCRC. This evidence has direct implications for treatment, formulary and pathways decision-making in this patient population.</p>","PeriodicalId":15539,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11284812/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adverse event costs of systemic therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy and biologics in the US.\",\"authors\":\"Victoria Federico Paly, Arvind Dasari, Joleen Hubbard, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Thihan Padukkavidana, Luis Hernandez\",\"doi\":\"10.57264/cer-2024-0084\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> The objective of this study was to compare adverse event (AE) management costs for fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) and trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (T/T+bev) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy from the US commercial and Medicare payer perspectives. <b>Materials & methods:</b> A cost-consequence model was developed to calculate the per-patient and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) AE costs using rates of grade 3/4 AEs with incidence ≥5% in clinical trials, event-specific management costs and duration treatment. Anchored comparisons of AE costs were calculated using a difference-in-differences approach with best supportive care (BSC) as a common reference. AE rates and treatment duration were obtained from clinical trials: FRESCO and FRESCO-2 (fruquintinib), RECOURSE (T/T), CORRECT (regorafenib) and SUNLIGHT (T/T, T/T+bev). AE management costs for the commercial and Medicare perspectives were obtained from publicly available sources. <b>Results:</b> From the commercial perspective, the AE costs (presented as per-patient, PPPM) were: $4015, $1091 for fruquintinib (FRESCO); $4253, $1390 for fruquintinib (FRESCO-2); $17,110, $11,104 for T/T (RECOURSE); $9851, $4691 for T/T (SUNLIGHT); $8199, $4823 for regorafenib; and $11,620, $2324 for T/T+bev. These results were consistent in anchored comparisons: the difference-in-difference for fruquintinib based on FRESCO was -$1929 versus regorafenib and -$11,427 versus T/T; for fruquintinib based on FRESCO-2 was -$2257 versus regorafenib and -$11,756 versus T/T. Across all analyses, results were consistent from the Medicare perspective. <b>Conclusion:</b> Fruquintinib was associated with lower AE management costs compared with regorafenib, T/T and T/T+bev for patients with previously treated mCRC. This evidence has direct implications for treatment, formulary and pathways decision-making in this patient population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15539,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of comparative effectiveness research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11284812/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of comparative effectiveness research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0084\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0084","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在从美国商业支付方和医疗保险支付方的角度,比较既往接受过至少两线治疗的转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)患者在使用 fruquintinib、regorafenib、trifluridine/tipiracil(T/T)和 trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (T/T+bev)治疗时的不良事件(AE)管理费用。材料与方法:利用临床试验中发病率≥5%的 3/4 级 AE 的发生率、特定事件的管理成本和治疗持续时间,开发了一个成本-后果模型来计算每位患者和每位患者每月 (PPPM) 的 AE 成本。AE成本的锚定比较采用差分法计算,以最佳支持性治疗(BSC)作为共同参照。AE 发生率和治疗持续时间来自临床试验:FRESCO和FRESCO-2(fruquintinib)、RECOURSE(T/T)、CORRECT(瑞戈非尼)和SUNLIGHT(T/T,T/T+bev)。商业和医疗保险方面的 AE 管理成本来自公开资料。结果:从商业角度来看,AE 成本(以每位患者 PPPM 表示)分别为福仑替尼(FRESCO)分别为 4015 美元、1091 美元;福仑替尼(FRESCO-2)分别为 4253 美元、1390 美元;T/T(RECOURSE)分别为 17110 美元、11104 美元;T/T(SUNLIGHT)分别为 9851 美元、4691 美元;瑞戈非尼分别为 8199 美元、4823 美元;T/T+贝伐分别为 11620 美元、2324 美元。这些结果在锚定比较中是一致的:基于FRESCO的fruquintinib与瑞戈非尼的差值为-1929美元,与T/T的差值为-11427美元;基于FRESCO-2的fruquintinib与瑞戈非尼的差值为-2257美元,与T/T的差值为-11756美元。从医疗保险的角度来看,所有分析的结果都是一致的。结论对于既往接受过治疗的 mCRC 患者,与瑞戈非尼、T/T 和 T/T+bev 相比,Fruquintinib 的 AE 管理成本更低。这一证据对这一患者群体的治疗、处方集和路径决策具有直接影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Adverse event costs of systemic therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy and biologics in the US.

Aim: The objective of this study was to compare adverse event (AE) management costs for fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) and trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (T/T+bev) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy from the US commercial and Medicare payer perspectives. Materials & methods: A cost-consequence model was developed to calculate the per-patient and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) AE costs using rates of grade 3/4 AEs with incidence ≥5% in clinical trials, event-specific management costs and duration treatment. Anchored comparisons of AE costs were calculated using a difference-in-differences approach with best supportive care (BSC) as a common reference. AE rates and treatment duration were obtained from clinical trials: FRESCO and FRESCO-2 (fruquintinib), RECOURSE (T/T), CORRECT (regorafenib) and SUNLIGHT (T/T, T/T+bev). AE management costs for the commercial and Medicare perspectives were obtained from publicly available sources. Results: From the commercial perspective, the AE costs (presented as per-patient, PPPM) were: $4015, $1091 for fruquintinib (FRESCO); $4253, $1390 for fruquintinib (FRESCO-2); $17,110, $11,104 for T/T (RECOURSE); $9851, $4691 for T/T (SUNLIGHT); $8199, $4823 for regorafenib; and $11,620, $2324 for T/T+bev. These results were consistent in anchored comparisons: the difference-in-difference for fruquintinib based on FRESCO was -$1929 versus regorafenib and -$11,427 versus T/T; for fruquintinib based on FRESCO-2 was -$2257 versus regorafenib and -$11,756 versus T/T. Across all analyses, results were consistent from the Medicare perspective. Conclusion: Fruquintinib was associated with lower AE management costs compared with regorafenib, T/T and T/T+bev for patients with previously treated mCRC. This evidence has direct implications for treatment, formulary and pathways decision-making in this patient population.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of comparative effectiveness research
Journal of comparative effectiveness research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides a rapid-publication platform for debate, and for the presentation of new findings and research methodologies. Through rigorous evaluation and comprehensive coverage, the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides stakeholders (including patients, clinicians, healthcare purchasers, and health policy makers) with the key data and opinions to make informed and specific decisions on clinical practice.
期刊最新文献
Dependent censoring bias assessment using inverse probability of censoring weights: Type 2 diabetes mellitus risk in patients initiating bisoprolol versus other antihypertensives in a Clinical Practice Research Datalink cohort study. Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and HTA: part 5. Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening with volume computed tomography in Portugal. Use of transportability methods for real-world evidence generation: a review of current applications. Ravulizumab for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis: a plain language summary of three studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1