Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pertuzumab Plus Trastuzumab and Docetaxel Compared With Trastuzumab and Docetaxel in the Adjuvant Treatment of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer in Colombia

Economic Evaluation of Neoadjuvant Versus Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

In the absence of evidence on whether neoadjuvant (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) is more beneficial for various tumor treatments, economic evaluation (EE) can assist medical decision making. There is limited evidence on their cost-effectiveness and their prospective evaluation is less likely in the future. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis about EE for NAC versus AC in solid tumor help compare these therapies from various perspectives.

METHODS

Various databases were searched for studies published from inception to 2021. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines and economic-specific guidelines. The data were pooled using a random effects model when possible.

RESULTS

The retrieval identified 15 EE studies of NAC versus AC in 8 types of cancer. NAC is the dominant strategy for pancreatic, head and neck, rectal, prostate cancers and colorectal liver metastases. For ovarian cancer, NAC is cost-effective with a lower cost and higher or similar quality-adjusted life-year. There were no significant differences in cost and outcomes for lung cancer. For stage IV or high-risk patients with ovarian or prostate cancer, NAC was cost-effective but not for patients who were not high risk.

CONCLUSIONS

The EEs results for NAC versus AC were inconsistent because of their different model structures, assumptions, cost inclusions, and a shortage of studies. There are multiple sources of heterogeneity across EEs evidence synthesis. More high-quality EE studies on NAC versus AC in initial cancer treatment are necessary.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Pertuzumab for the Treatment of Metastatic HER2+ Breast Cancer in Czechia: A Semi-Markov Model Using Cost States

OBJECTIVES

This article estimates the cost-effectiveness of adding pertuzumab to the combination of trastuzumab and docetaxel within the first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer with the amplification of HER2+.

METHODS

Data from Czech clinical practice recorded in the BREAST register are used. A semi-Markov model with states derived based on the treatment phases (first-line medication, no medication, next-line medication, death) is defined to estimate costs from the healthcare payers' perspective. The benefits are estimated as patient survival until death. The Kaplan-Meier estimates are supplemented by the Cox proportional hazard and the accelerated failure time models to control for patient characteristics. Health-related quality-of-life indicators are derived from relevant literature.

RESULTS

Based on the used data, adding pertuzumab does not result in statistically significantly longer survival while inducing higher treatment costs (€163 360 compared with €90 112 per patient in 2018 prices). Statistically longer survival was not supported by the log-rank test (P = .97), the Cox proportional hazard model, or the accelerated failure time model using the Gompertz distribution. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (€87 200) substantially exceeds the willingness to pay for 1 quality-adjusted life-year (€46 500).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis indicates that adding pertuzumab cannot be considered cost-effective in Czechia. However, the observed phenomenon may be attributed to the limited duration of patient follow-up periods at the time of the study's execution (mean of 20-21 months). Importantly, we find that using states connected to specific treatment phases is appropriate for a retrospective analysis of patient-level clinical data.