Cost-effectiveness of oxaliplatin and capecitabine in the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer

Cost-Utility and Budget Impact Analyses of Oral Chemotherapy for Stage III Colorectal Cancer: Real-World Evidence after Policy Implementation in Thailand

This study conducted a cost-utility analysis and a budget impact analysis (BIA) of outpatient oral chemotherapy versus inpatient intravenous chemotherapy for stage III colorectal cancer (CRC) in Thailand. A Markov model was constructed to estimate the lifetime cost and health outcomes based on a societal perspective. Eight chemotherapy strategies were compared. Clinical and cost data on adjuvant chemotherapy were collected from the medical records of 1747 patients at Siriraj Hospital, Thailand. The cost-effectiveness results were interpreted against a Thai willingness-to-pay threshold of USD 5003/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A 5-year BIA was performed. Of the eight strategies, CAPOX then FOLFIRI yielded the highest life-year and QALY gains. Its total lifetime cost was also the highest. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CAPOX then FOLFIRI compared to 5FU/LV then FOLFOX, a commonly used regimen USD was 4258 per QALY gained.The BIA showed that when generic drug prices were applied, 5-FU/LV then FOLFOX had the smallest budgetary impact (USD 9.1 million). CAPOX then FOLFIRI required an approximately three times higher budgetary level (USD 25.1 million). CAPOX then FOLFIRI is the best option. It is cost-effective compared with 5-FU/LV then FOLFOX. However, policymakers should consider the relatively high budgetary burden of the CAPOX then FOLFIRI regimen.

Health economic evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II and III colon cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study was to appraise the health economic evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) strategies in stage II and III colon cancer (CC) and identify gaps in the available evidence that might inform further research.

METHOD

A systematic review of published economic evaluations was undertaken. Four databases were searched and full-text publications in English were screened for inclusion. A narrative synthesis was performed to summarise the evidence.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies were identified and stratified by cancer stage and AC strategy. The majority (89%) were full economic evaluations considering both health outcomes, usually measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs. AC was found to be cost-effective compared to no AC for both stage II and III CC. Oral and oxaliplatin-based AC was cost-effective for stage III. Three months of CAPOX was cost-effective compared to 6-month in high-risk stage II and stage III CC. Preliminary evidence suggests that biomarker approaches to AC selection in stage II can reduce costs and improve health outcomes. Notably, assessment of QALYs were predominantly reliant on a small number of non-contemporary health-utility studies. Only 32% of studies considered societal costs such as travel and time off work.

CONCLUSIONS

Published economic evaluations consistently supported the use of AC in stage II and III colon cancer. Biomarker-driven approaches to patient selection have great potential to be cost-effective, but more robust clinical and economic evidence is warranted. Patient surveys embedded into clinical trials may address critical knowledge gaps regarding accurate assessment of QALYs and societal costs in the modern era.

Impact of new cancer therapies on outpatient treatment delivery for colorectal cancer: A population-based study

We investigated the impact of new systemic therapies approved in Canada for colorectal cancer on the frequency, intensity and duration of oncology clinic and infusion visits over five treatment phases from diagnosis (P1, P3) to treatment (P2, P4) of primary and metastatic disease, respectively, and during the last 6 months of life (P5). In total, 15,157 adult patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer and referred between 2000 and 2012 to any cancer clinic in British Columbia, Canada, were included. Frequency, intensity and duration of medical oncology clinic visits (CVs), oncology infusions (OIs) and oncology prescriptions (OPs) were measured by treatment phase. Mean, total and adjusted total duration for CVs increased for P1-5. CVs increased in P1-5, and in P1-4 when adjusted by treatment length. Adjusted and unadjusted OIs decreased in P1 coinciding with the introduction of an oral treatment option, but increased in P2-5. Mean OI duration increased in P1-5, while total and adjusted total decreased in P1 and increased in P2-5. OPs increased in P2-4, but were unchanged in P1 and P5. Multi-fold increases in resources and time required per patient were also observed, which have significant implications for demand projections in cancer care planning and delivery. In conclusion, patients required more visits in almost all treatment phases, visits on average took longer and patients were in treatment for longer periods of time.

Influence of MSI and 18q LOH markers on capecitabine adjuvant monotherapy in colon cancer patients

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether pretreatment analysis of selected molecular markers can be used for the prediction of disease-free survival (DFS)/overall survival (OS) of capecitabine adjuvant monotherapy in colon cancer patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 126 patients enrolled in a capecitabine Phase IV clinical trial were analyzed for microsatellite instability (MSI), 18q loss of heterozygosity (LOH), thymidylate synthase (TYMS) 5' variable number of tandem repeat (VNTR), and methylene tetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T variants. The significance in predicting 5-year DFS/OS was assessed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

The MSI-high (MSI-H) genotype was significantly associated with DFS (HR 0.205, 95% CI 0.05-0.88, P=0.033) and OS (HR 0.208, 95% CI 0.05-0.89, P=0.035) compared to the microsatellite stable genotype. In models stratified according to clinicopathologic characteristics, the MSI-H genotype remained a positive predictive factor for DFS/OS only in patients with stage III (P=0.023) and patients with tumors localized proximally to the splenic flexure (P=0.004). Distal colon cancers with 18q LOH have a greater survival rate when treated with capecitabine than patients with stable tumors (81.3% vs 50.0%, HR for relapse 0.348, 95% CI 0.13-0.97, P=0.043). TYMS 5'VNTR and MTHFR C677T variants were not associated with DFS or OS.

CONCLUSION

MSI and 18q LOH markers have the potential to be utilized in the selection of colon cancer patients eligible for capecitabine adjuvant monotherapy.

Replicating Health Economic Models: Firm Foundations or a House of Cards?

Health economic evaluation is a framework for the comparative analysis of the incremental health gains and costs associated with competing decision alternatives. The process of developing health economic models is usually complex, financially expensive and time-consuming. For these reasons, model development is sometimes based on previous model-based analyses; this endeavour is usually referred to as model replication. Such model replication activity may involve the comprehensive reproduction of an existing model or 'borrowing' all or part of a previously developed model structure. Generally speaking, the replication of an existing model may require substantially less effort than developing a new de novo model by bypassing, or undertaking in only a perfunctory manner, certain aspects of model development such as the development of a complete conceptual model and/or comprehensive literature searching for model parameters. A further motivation for model replication may be to draw on the credibility or prestige of previous analyses that have been published and/or used to inform decision making. The acceptability and appropriateness of replicating models depends on the decision-making context: there exists a trade-off between the 'savings' afforded by model replication and the potential 'costs' associated with reduced model credibility due to the omission of certain stages of model development. This paper provides an overview of the different levels of, and motivations for, replicating health economic models, and discusses the advantages, disadvantages and caveats associated with this type of modelling activity. Irrespective of whether replicated models should be considered appropriate or not, complete replicability is generally accepted as a desirable property of health economic models, as reflected in critical appraisal checklists and good practice guidelines. To this end, the feasibility of comprehensive model replication is explored empirically across a small number of recent case studies. Recommendations are put forward for improving reporting standards to enhance comprehensive model replicability.

Pre-clinical characterization of 4SC-202, a novel class I HDAC inhibitor, against colorectal cancer cells

Histone deacetylase (HDAC) overactivity in colorectal cancer (CRC) promotes cancer progression. In the current study, we showed that 4SC-202, a novel class I HDAC inhibitor (HDACi), potently inhibited survival and proliferation of primary human colon cancer cells and established CRC lines (HT-29, HCT-116, HT-15, and DLD-1). Yet, the same 4SC-202 treatment was non-cytotoxic to colon epithelial cells where HDAC-1/-2 expressions were extremely low. 4SC-202 provoked apoptosis activation in CRC cells, while caspase inhibitors (z-VAD-CHO and z-DVED-CHO) significantly alleviated 4SC-202-exerted cytotoxicity in CRC cells. Meanwhile, 4SC-202 induced dramatic G2-M arrest in CRC cells. Further studies showed that AKT activation might be an important resistance factor of 4SC-202. 4SC-202-induced cytotoxicity was dramatically potentiated with serum starvation, AKT inhibition (by perifosine or MK-2206), or AKT1-shRNA knockdown in CRC cells. On the other hand, exogenous expression of constitutively active AKT1 (CA-AKT1) decreased the sensitivity by 4SC-202 in HT-29 cells. Notably, 4SC-202, at a low concentration, enhanced oxaliplatin-induced in vitro anti-CRC activity. In vivo, we showed that oral gavage of 4SC-202 inhibited HT-29 xenograft growth in nude mice, and when combined with oxaliplatin, its activity was further strengthened. Together, these pre-clinical results indicate that 4SC-202 may be further investigated as a valuable anti-CRC agent/chemo-adjuvant.

Cost-utility analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer in Thailand

BACKGROUND

In Thailand, there has been no economic evaluation study of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer patients after resection.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the cost-utility of all chemotherapy regimens currently used in Thailand compared with the adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) plus capecitabine as the first-line therapy for metastatic disease in patients with stage III colon cancer after resection.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis was performed to estimate the relevant lifetime costs and health outcomes of chemotherapy regimens based on a societal perspective using a Markov model.

RESULTS

The results suggested that the adjuvant 5-FU/LV plus capecitabine as the first-line therapy for metastatic disease would be the most cost-effective chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjuvant FOLFOX and FOLFIRI as the first-line treatment for metastatic disease would be cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 299,365 Thai baht per QALY gained based on a societal perspective if both prices of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI were decreased by 40%.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Adjuvant Stage III Colon Cancer Treatment at Veterans Affairs Medical Centers

The objective of this study was to evaluate the real-world cost effectiveness of adjuvant stage III colon cancer chemotherapy regimens, given that previous analyses have been based on data from clinical trials. The study was designed using integrated decision tree and Markov model, which was developed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV), capecitabine, and the combination of each with oxaliplatin. The analysis was performed from a US Veterans Affairs perspective via retrospectively collected data, over a 5-year model time horizon. Outcome and cost data were used to calculate cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY), and one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. In the base case analysis, capecitabine and capecitabine plus oxaliplatin both cost more and were less effective than other regimens, and 5-FU/LV plus oxaliplatin, compared to 5-FU/LV alone, resulted in a cost of $25,997 per QALY gained. Model results were generally robust to parameter variation. Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin could be economically reasonable if full dosing occurred ≥76% of the time (base case 42%). In a real-world setting, the addition of oxaliplatin to 5-FU/LV is more effective but also more costly than 5-FU/LV alone. If full dosing of capecitabine-containing regimens can be assured, they may also be cost-effective strategies.

Real-world cost-effectiveness of oxaliplatin in stage III colon cancer: a synthesis of clinical trial and daily practice evidence

OBJECTIVES

Previous cost-effectiveness analyses of oxaliplatin have been based on randomised trials whereas current Dutch policy requires evidence from daily practice. The objective of this study was to examine the real-world cost-effectiveness of oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidines (FL) versus FL-only as adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to estimate lifetime cost and quality-adjusted life-years from a hospital perspective. The effectiveness of the oxaliplatin arm was modelled by combining published efficacy data from the pivotal clinical registration trial (MOSAIC trial) with real-world (RW) data from a Dutch population-based observational study. RW patients were categorised into "eligible" or "ineligible", depending on whether the patients fulfilled the MOSAIC trial eligibility criteria. Ineligible RW patients (18 %) had a poorer prognosis than eligible RW patients (82 %) and MOSAIC trial patients. The effectiveness of the comparator was modelled using MOSAIC trial results. All cost inputs were based on RW patients and reported in Euro 2012. Cost-effectiveness analyses were performed for four different scenarios: (1) cost-effectiveness analyses based on MOSAIC trial patients; (2) cost-effectiveness analyses using MOSAIC and eligible RW patients; (3) cost-effectiveness analyses using MOSAIC and both eligible and ineligible RW patients, assuming oxaliplatin had an equal effect in ineligible and eligible patients; (4) cost-effectiveness analyses using MOSAIC and both eligible and ineligible RW patients, assuming oxaliplatin had no effect amongst ineligibles. For each scenario, univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken.

RESULTS

MOSAIC trial patients and eligible RW patients treated with oxaliplatin had comparable 2-year disease-free survivals (79.5 vs. 78.4 %). Oxaliplatin showed an incremental QALY gain of 1.02, 1.13, 1.17 and 0.93 and incremental cost of <euro>9,961, <euro>11,055, <euro>9,814 and <euro>11,854 in scenarios 1-4, respectively. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were <euro>9,766, <euro>9,783, <euro>8,388 and <euro>12,746 in scenarios 1-4, respectively. In all scenarios, univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that the ICERs are acceptable and robust under a wide range of model assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICERs of the different scenarios that resulted from combining MOSAIC trial data with data from Dutch daily practice all suggest that FL + oxaliplatin is cost-effective versus FL alone in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer. This article illustrates how one could design and implement a real-world cost-effectiveness study to yield internally valid results that could also be generalisable.

Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant FOLFOX and 5FU/LV chemotherapy for patients with stage II colon cancer

PURPOSE

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy using 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin (5FU/LV), and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) compared with 5FU/LV alone and 5FU/LV compared with observation alone for patients who had resected stage II colon cancer.

METHODS

We developed 2 Markov models to represent the adjuvant chemotherapy and follow-up periods and a single Markov model to represent the observation group. We used calibration to estimate the transition probabilities among different toxicity levels. The base case considered 60-year-old patients who had undergone an uncomplicated hemicolectomy for stage II colon cancer and were medically fit to receive 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy. We measured health outcomes in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and estimated costs using 2007 US dollars.

RESULTS

In the base case, adjuvant chemotherapy of the FOLFOX regimen had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $54,359/QALY compared with the 5FU/LV regimen, and the 5FU/LV regimen had an ICER of $14,584/QALY compared with the observation group from the third-party payer perspective. The ICER values were most sensitive to 5-year relapse probability, cost of adjuvant chemotherapy, and the discount rate for the FOLFOX arm, whereas the ICER value of 5FU/LV was most sensitive to the 5-year relapse probability, 5-year survival probability, and the relapse cost. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicates that the ICER of 5FU/LV is less than $50,000/QALY with a probability of 99.62%, and the ICER of FOLFOX as compared with 5FU/LV is less than $50,000/QALY and $100,000/QALY with a probability of 44.48% and 97.24%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although adjuvant chemotherapy with 5FU/LV is cost-effective at all ages for patients who have undergone an uncomplicated hemicolectomy for stage II colon cancer, FOLFOX is not likely to be cost-effective as compared with 5FU/LV.

A multigene prognostic assay for selection of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with T3, stage II colon cancer: impact on quality-adjusted life expectancy and costs

OBJECTIVES

Uncertainty exists regarding appropriate and affordable use of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer (T3, proficient DNA mismatch repair). This study aimed to estimate the effectiveness and costs from a US societal perspective of a multigene recurrence score (RS) assay for patients recently diagnosed with stage II colon cancer (T3, proficient DNA mismatch repair) eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

RS was compared with guideline-recommended clinicopathological factors (tumor stage, lymph nodes examined, tumor grade, and lymphovascular invasion) by using a state-transition (Markov) lifetime model. Data were obtained from published literature, a randomized controlled trial (QUick And Simple And Reliable) of adjuvant chemotherapy, and rates of chemotherapy use from the National Cooperative Cancer Network Colon/Rectum Cancer Outcomes study. Life-years, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and lifetime costs were examined.

RESULTS

The RS is projected to reduce adjuvant chemotherapy use by 17% compared with current treatment patterns and to increase quality-adjusted life expectancy by an average of 0.035 years. Direct medical costs are expected to decrease by an average of $2971 per patient. The assay was cost saving for all subgroups of patients stratified by clinicopathologic factors. The most influential variables affecting treatment decisions were projected years of life remaining, recurrence score, and patients' disutilities associated with adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the multigene RS to assess recurrence risk after surgery in stage II colon cancer (T3, proficient DNA mismatch repair) may reduce the use of adjuvant chemotherapy without decreasing quality-adjusted life expectancy and be cost saving from a societal perspective. These findings need to be validated in additional cohorts, including studies of clinical practice as assay use diffuses into nonacademic settings.

Clinical management of localized colon cancer with capecitabine

Large randomized trials demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of the primary colon cancer. It improves overall survival and reduces the risk of death, by 5% in UICC (Union Internationale Contre le Cancer) stage II and approximately 15%-20% in stage III. Fluoropyrimidines have been the standard drugs for the treatment of colon cancer since large randomized controlled trials demonstrated their efficacy and safety in treating patients suffering from this disease. Capecitabine is an orally administered fluoropyrimidine, which is preferably activated in tumor tissue to the active moiety 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and is cytotoxic through inhibition of DNA synthesis. It has proven equivalent efficacy and tolerability despite a changed toxicity profile compared to 5FU with less myelosuppression but more hand-and-foot syndrome. Capecitabine is well tolerated in elderly patients. The oral route of administration avoids frequent clinical visits as well as insertion of central venous catheters. The impact of the particular drug features on daily clinical practice is discussed in this review.

Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant FOLFOX therapy for stage III colon cancer in Japan based on the MOSAIC trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant FOLFOX therapy versus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FU/LV) for patients with stage III colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We performed the cost-effectiveness of FOLFOX compared with standard FU/LV treatment by the retrospective analysis of patient-level data from the randomized controlled Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer (MOSAIC) trial. Predicted mean time spent in each disease state was calculated by our statistical model, which takes into account the cure rate and treats death from causes other than colon cancer as a competing risk. We performed this analysis from the perspective of the health-care payer. Using a time horizon of 30 years, both cost and effectiveness were discounted by 3% per year.

RESULTS

Estimated cure rates for colon cancer were 0.715 (FOLFOX) and 0.622 (FU/LV). Estimated medical costs of FOLFOX were JPY 3.1 million (USD 34,000) compared with JPY 1.9 million (USD 22,000) of FU/LV. The mean estimated quality-adjusted life-year was 9.83 with FOLFOX and 9.07 with that of FU/LV. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of FOLFOX was JPY 1.5 million (USD 17,000) per quality-adjusted life-year compared with FU/LV, which was supported by sensitivity analysis. Even if we assume that Japanese outcomes were better than those reported by the MOSAIC trial, which would reduce the difference between cure rates for each treatment to 5%, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio remained below 5.0 million (USD 56,000) per quality-adjusted life-year.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant FOLFOX is a cost-effective treatment for stage III colon cancer in Japan compared with FU/LV therapy. Even when parameters were changed to reflect smaller improvements with FOLFOX, the conclusion is the same.

Oncologic outcome after cessation or dose reduction of capecitabine in patients with colon cancer

Purpose

Oral capecitabine has been used as adjuvant therapy for colorectal cancer patients since the 1990s. Patient-initiated cessation or reduced use of capecitabine occurs widely for various reasons, yet the consequences of these actions are unclear. The present study sought to clarify treatment outcomes in such patients.

Methods

The study included 173 patients who had been diagnosed with stage II or III colon cancer according to the pathologic report after radical surgery at Samsung Medical Center from May 2005 to June 2007 and who had received capecitabine as adjuvant therapy. The patients were divided into groups according to whether the dose was reduced (I, dose maintenance; II, dose reduction) or stopped (A, cycle completion; B, cycle cessation). Recurrence and disease-free survival rates between the two groups each were analyzed.

Results

Of the 173 patients, 128 (74.6%) experienced complications, most frequently hand-foot syndrome (n = 114). Reduction (n = 35) or cessation (n = 18) of medication was most commonly due to complications. Concerning reduced dosage, both groups displayed no statistically significant differences in recurrence rate and 3-year disease-free survival rate. Concerning discontinued medication use, the cycle completion group showed an improved recurrence rate (P = 0.048) and 3-year disease-free survival rate (P = 0.028).

Conclusion

The results demonstrate that maintaining compliance with capecitabine as an adjuvant treatment for colon cancer to preventing complications positively affects patient prognosis.

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.

Systematic review of economic evidence for the detection, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of colorectal cancer in the United Kingdom

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the availability and consistency of economic evidence for the detection, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of colorectal cancer.

Methods: A systematic review of UK economic evaluations of colorectal cancer interventions was undertaken. Searches were undertaken across ten electronic databases. Studies were critically appraised through reference to a conceptual model of UK colorectal cancer services.

Results: Forty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. There is a substantial economic evidence base surrounding population-level colorectal screening, surgical procedures, and cytotoxic therapies for the adjuvant and palliative treatment of colorectal cancer. There is limited evidence concerning the diagnosis of suspected colorectal cancer, curative treatments for metastatic disease and follow-up regimens for nonmetastatic disease. No studies were identified relating to the economics of radiotherapy, surveillance of increased-risk groups, end-of-life care, or the management of hereditary colorectal cancer. Where evidence is available, studies are subject to important differences concerning treatment options, decision criteria, and incongruent assumptions concerning the disease and its management.

Conclusions: Across many aspects of the colorectal cancer service, current practice appears to have emerged without the consideration or support of economic evidence. There is a need to develop a common understanding how colorectal cancer models should be structured and implemented.

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.

Preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen level as a predictive factor of recurrence after curative resection of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the prognostic value of the preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study group comprised 638 patients. The optimal cutoff value for the preoperative serum CEA level was determined. Predictive factors of recurrence were evaluated using multivariate analyses. The relapse-free time was investigated according to the CEA level.

RESULTS

All patients underwent potentially curative resection for CRC without distant metastasis, classified as stage I, II, or III. The optimal cutoff value for preoperative serum CEA level was 10 ng/ml. Elevated preoperative serum CEA level was observed in 92 patients. Multivariate analysis identified tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage and preoperative serum CEA level as independent predictive factors of recurrence. The relapse-free survival between CEA levels >10 ng/ml and <10 ng/ml significantly differed in patients with stage II and III. However, there was no significant difference in relapse-free survival between CEA levels >10 ng/ml and <10 ng/ml in patients with stage I.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative serum CEA is a reliable predictive factor of recurrence after curative surgery in CRC patients and a useful indicator of the optimal treatment after resection, particularly for cases classified as stage II or stage III.

A review of the role of capecitabine in the treatment of colorectal cancer

5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, with or without oxaliplatin or irinotecan, is the most widely used treatment for the metastatic as well for the adjuvant setting of colorectal cancer. These agents are administered intravenously (by bolus or infusion), thereby causing significant inconvenience to patients. Capecitabine, an oral fluoropyrimidine, has been demonstrated to be at least as effective as bolus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin in terms of time to disease progression, time to treatment failure, and overall survival, but achieves significantly higher response rates and has the advantage of oral administration. In addition, capecitabine has improved tolerability with a significantly lower incidence of stomatitis, nausea, and alopecia than 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin. Clinical trials have shown that combination therapy with capecitabine and either irinotecan or oxaliplatin is effective and well tolerated. The combination of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin, with or without bevacizumab, could represent the new standard of care for metastatic as well as surgically resected high-risk stage II and III colon cancer patients. Some pharmacoeconomic analyses have highlighted that capecitabine plus oxaliplatin results in cost savings compared with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin.