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

Cost-Effectiveness of Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy vs. Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Gastric Cancer/Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer/Esophagel Adenocarcinoma in China

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy as first-line therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer/esophageal adenocarcinoma from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

Methods

This economic evaluation used a state-transition Markov model to assess the cost and effectiveness of nivolumab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer/esophageal adenocarcinoma. The characteristics of patients in the model came from a phase 3 open-label randomized clinical trial (CheckMate 649). Key clinical data were based on the CheckMate 649 trial conducted from March 2017 to April 2019, and costs and utilities were collected from the published literature. The total cost of treatment per patient, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated for the two treatment strategies. Deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed.

Results

In the baseline analysis, the incremental effectiveness and cost of nivolumab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy were 0.28 QALYs and $78,626.53, resulting in an ICER of $278,658.71/QALY, higher than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of China ($31,498.70/QALY). The model was sensitive to the duration of progression-free survival (PFS) for the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group, the cost of nivolumab per 100 mg, and the utility of PFS.

Conclusion

Nivolumab plus chemotherapy was clearly not a cost-effective treatment strategy compared with chemotherapy as first-line therapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer/esophageal adenocarcinoma in China. Reducing the price of nivolumab may improve its cost-effectiveness.

In vitro and in vivo Evaluation of a Novel Estrogen-Targeted PEGylated Oxaliplatin Liposome for Gastric Cancer

Background

Chemotherapy is still the main first-line treatment for advanced metastatic gastric cancer, but it has the limitations of serious side effects and drug resistance. Conventional liposome has been substantially used as drug carriers, but they lack targeting character with lower drug bioavailability in tumor tissues. Based on the above problems, a novel estrogen-targeted PEGylated liposome loaded with oxaliplatin (ES-SSL-OXA) was prepared to further improve the metabolic behavior, the safety profile, and the anti-tumor efficacy of oxaliplatin.

Methods

Four kinds of oxaliplatin (OXA) liposomes were prepared by film hydration method. The obtained formulations were characterized in terms of entrapment efficiency (EE), particle size, and so on by HPLC and DLS (dynamic light scanning). The morphology of ES-SSL-OXA was detected by transmission electron microscope (TEM). The in vitro and in vivo targeting effect of ES-SSL-OXA was verified by fluorescence microscopy and in vivo imaging system in gastric cancer cells (SGC-7901) and tumor-bearing athymic mice. The in vitro and in vivo antitumor efficacies of ES-SSL-OXA were investigated on SGC-7901 cells and athymic tumor-bearing mice. Pharmacokinetic, biodistribution, and acute toxicity tests of ES-SSL-OXA were performed on ICR mice.

Results

The ES-SSL-OXA exhibited an average particle size of about 153.37 nm with an encapsulation efficiency of 46.20% and low leakage rates at 4°C and 25°C. In vivo and in vitro targeting study confirmed that ES-SSL-OXA could effectively target the tumor site. The antitumor activity demonstrated the strongest inhibition in tumor growth of ES-SSL-OXA. Pharmacokinetics and acute toxicity study showed that ES-SSL-OXA could significantly improve the metabolic behavior and toxicity profile of oxaliplatin.

Conclusion

In this study, a novel estrogen-targeted long-acting liposomal formulation of OXA was successfully prepared. ES fragment effectively targeted the delivery system to tumor tissues which highly express estrogen receptor, providing a promising therapeutic method for gastric cancer in clinic.

The cost of chemotherapy administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Cancer treatment is a significant driver of healthcare costs worldwide, however, the economic impact of treating patients with anti-neoplastic agents is poorly elucidated. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the direct costs associated with administering intravenous chemotherapy in an outpatient setting.

METHODS

We systematically searched four databases from 2010 to present and extracted hourly administration costs and the respective components of each estimate. Separate analyses were conducted of Canadian and United States (US) studies, respectively, to address a priori hypotheses regarding heterogeneity amongst estimates. The Drummond checklist was used to assess risk-of-bias. Data were summarized using medians with interquartile ranges and five outliers were identified; costs were presented in 2019 USD.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies were analyzed, including sub-analyses of 19 US and seven Canadian studies. 26/44 studies were of moderate-high quality. When components of administration cost were evaluated, physician costs were reported most frequently (24 studies), followed by lab tests (13) and overhead costs (9). The median estimate (excluding outliers) was $142/hour (IQR = $103-166). The median administration cost in the US was $149/hour (IQR = $118-158), and was $128/hour (IQR = $102-137) in Canada.

CONCLUSIONS

There is currently a paucity of literature addressing the costs of chemotherapy administration, and existing studies utilize a patchwork of reporting methodologies which renders direct comparison challenging. Our results demonstrate that the cost of administering chemotherapy is approximately $125-150/hour, globally. This value is dependent upon the region of analysis, inclusiveness of cost subcomponents as well as the methodology used to estimate unit prices, as described here.

A decision analysis comparing three strategies for peritoneal lavage cytology testing in staging of gastric cancer in China

BACKGROUND

Positive peritoneal cytology (PCY) indicates metastasis (M1) in gastric cancer (GC) patients; both the American and Chinese guidelines recommend laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (LPL) for cytology. However, relatively high costs impair the widespread use of LPL in some resource-limited regions in China, and the cost-effectiveness of PCY testing remains unclear. Therefore, we performed a decision analysis to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PCY testing by comparing the guideline-recommended intraoperative LPL, a newly proposed preoperative percutaneous peritoneal lavage (PPL), and a third strategy of exploratory laparotomy with no cytology testing (ELNC) among GC patients.

METHODS

We developed a decision-analytic Markov model of the aforementioned three strategies for a hypothetical cohort of GC patients with curative intent after initial imaging, from the perspective of Chinese society. We estimated costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) as primary outcomes; we also conducted one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to investigate the model's robustness.

RESULTS

We found that ELNC was dominated (i.e., more expensive and less effective) by PPL and LPL. LPL was the most cost-effective method with an ICER of US$17,200/QALY compared to PPL, which was below the Chinese willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of US$29,313 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analyses, PPL was more likely to be cost-effective with a lower WTP threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Cytology testing through either LPL or PPL was less expensive and more effective than ELNC among GC patients. Moreover, LPL was the most cost-effective modality at the current WTP threshold, while PPL could potentially be cost-effective in lower-income areas.

Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Gastric Cancer: Efficacy and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Purpose: The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) for localized gastric cancer (GC) after D2-gastrectomy has been clearly demonstrated. However, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) remains controversial. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of treatment for GC after D2-gastrectomy. Materials and methods: Stage IB-IIICGC patients who had received adjuvant CRT or CT, or who had just been observed after D2-gastrectomy were retrospectively selected. Therapeutic strategy after surgery, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events and costs were recorded retrospectively. A Markov model was developed to simulate the process of GC after D2-gastrectomy. Health outcomes were measured using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was regarded as the primary outcome. Results: A total of 254 patients were selected. Three year OS and DFS were 83.02 and 64.15% in the adjuvant CRT group, 74.19 and 63.54% in the adjuvant CT group, and 45.45 and 43.35% in the observation group. Total grade 3 or 4 toxicity was higher in the CRT group than in the CT group (54.72% vs. 37.10%, p < 0.05). The ICER of the CT and CRT groups vs. the observation group were $10,571.55 and $11,467.41/QALY, respectively. The probability of CT, CRT and observation being cost-effective were 28.9, 37.9, and 33.2%, respectively, when a willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of $25,648.45/QALY was used. Conclusions: Adjuvant CRT was associated with improved OS and DFS compared with adjuvant CT and postoperative observation. Both adjuvant CRT and CT are likely to be cost effective compared with postoperative observation. However, adjuvant CRT was the optimal choice for a WTP threshold of $25,648.45/QALY.

Factors related to the receipt of adjuvant therapy among patients with gastric cancer in Western China

OBJECTIVE

Adjuvant therapy following curative resection has been shown to be associated with significant survival benefits in patients with gastric cancer (GC); however, this treatment is not available to some patients. The aim was to investigate factors associated with the receipt of adjuvant therapy among GC patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study including patients with stage IB-IIIC gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent curative resection between November 2010 and July 2014. Patients were identified using a database from West China Hospital, Sichuan University. Univariate and multivariable analyses examined factors associated with adjuvant therapy receipt.

RESULTS

A total of 1,476 patients were included. Among these, 852 patients were eligible, with 157 patients not receiving adjuvant therapy. Age, education, income, residence, medical insurance, employment status and visiting an oncologist were independently associated with adjuvant therapy receipt by univariate analysis. After adjustment for other factors, medical insurance (p = 0.005), employment status (p = 0.008) and visiting an oncologist (p < 0.001) remained significantly correlated, and income was near the threshold of a significant difference (p = 0.050).

CONCLUSION

Our study indicates that disparities do exist in determining the receipt of adjuvant therapy in GC patients according to income, insurance and employment status, and highlight the importance of visiting an oncologist postoperatively.

Cost analysis for different sequential treatment regimens for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in China

PURPOSE

Targeted therapies, including sunitinib, sorafenib, axitinib, and everolimus, have recently become the mainstay for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The objective of this study was to estimate the costs of sequential treatment regimens for mRCC and associated adverse events (AEs) from the Chinese payers' perspective.

METHODS

Key inputs included in the calculation were patient population, dosing information, incidence rates and associated costs of Grade 3/4 AEs, treatment costs (including drug discount programs), and patients' progression-free survival (PFS) as a proxy for length of treatment. To calculate PFS, this study identified pivotal clinical trials and generated a reconstructed individual patient data set from the published Kaplan-Meier survival curves. The median PFS from the pooled estimates were used in the calculation. In the base-case scenario, sunitinib was used as first line and the other three therapies were used as second line. Sensitivity analyses were conducted where (1) sorafenib was used as first line, or (2) a third-line therapy was added to the base-case scenario.

RESULTS

In the base case, the cost per patient per treatment month (PPPM) cost was the lowest for sunitinib + axitinib among all sequential regimens (¥14,898) and was the highest for sunitinib + sorafenib (¥20,103). If sorafenib is used as first line, everolimus had lower per patient per months (PPPM) cost than axitinib (¥17,046 vs ¥23,337), but also had shorter PFS (13.5 months vs 15 months). Second sensitivity analysis with an additional third-line therapy showed consistent results with the base-case scenario; axitinib as second line was the least costly.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that, for mRCC sequential treatment, sunitinib followed by axitinib generates the highest cost savings from the Chinese payers' perspective. Future studies are warranted to examine the cost-effectiveness of various mRCC treatment regimens in Chinese populations.

Targeted literature review of the global burden of gastric cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) and gastroesophageal junction cancers (GEJCs) are the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Although several studies have evaluated the epidemiology and management of GC and GEJC, to our knowledge, no global estimates of the economic burden of GC and GEJC have yet been reported. This targeted literature review was conducted to summarise the epidemiology and management of GC and GEJC and to estimate its global economic and humanistic burden. The incidence of GC and GEJC is highest in Eastern Asia, several South and Central American countries and Central and Eastern Europe and lowest in North America and Africa. Prognosis is generally poor; the global 5-year survival rate is 5%-10% in advanced stages. Patients with GC and GEJC have more severe symptoms compared with patients with other cancers, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) worsens as the disease progresses. Given the rapid progression of GC and GEJC at advanced stages, chemotherapy, despite its toxicity, improves HRQoL compared with best supportive care. The costs of GC/GEJC are generally higher than for other cancers; in the US, the average annual cost per patient between 1998 and 2003 was 46,501 USD, compared with 29,609 USD and 35,672 USD for colorectal and lung cancer, respectively. Based on the 2012 incidence data and average costs per patient, estimates of the annual financial burden of GC and GEJC revealed great regional differences. Japan and Iran had the highest (8,492 million USD) and lowest (27 million USD) costs for 2017, respectively, while the estimate for the US was 3,171 million USD. The overall annual cost of GC and GEJC estimated for 2017 in a geographic area including Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK), Asia (Iran, Japan and China), North America (Canada and the US) and Australia was 20.6 billion USD.

Cutting-edge evidence of adjuvant treatments for gastric cancer

In recent decades, adjuvant therapy has secured a firm position in the treatment of gastric cancer by improving patient prognosis. Currently, standard therapy varies between East Asia, Europe and North America due to heterogeneities of the tumor, race, medical environment and/or surgical procedure. Although adjuvant strategies, proved effective in each region and implemented to clinical practice, certain patient populations with advanced gastric cancer show recurrence and a fatal prognosis. The development of a universal adjuvant therapy with a high efficacy and acceptable adverse events or with less toxicity and non-inferiority seems to have become urgent and imperative. Areas covered: In this review, we aimed to summarize the current knowledge regarding adjuvant therapies for gastric cancer, including chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy and molecular targeted therapy, based on clinical trials and to introduce the pivotal ongoing phase III trials. Expert commentary: The efficacy of adjuvant therapy to prevent recurrence remains insufficient although several trials have shown a significant benefit in patients with localized advanced gastric cancer. The development of more effective and universal multimodal adjuvant therapy is required.

Annual cost of illness of stomach and esophageal cancer patients in urban and rural areas in China: A multi-center study

Objective

Stomach and esophageal cancer are imposing huge threats to the health of Chinese people whereas there were few studies on the financial burden of the two cancers.

Methods

Costs per hospitalization of all patients with stomach or esophageal cancer discharged between September 2015 and August 2016 in seven cities/counties in China were collected, together with their demographic information and clinical details. Former patients in the same hospitals were sampled to collect information on annual direct non-medical cost, indirect costs and annual number of hospitalization. Annual direct medical cost was obtained by multiplying cost per hospitalization by annual number of hospitalization. Annual cost of illness (ACI) was obtained by adding the average value of annual direct medical cost, direct non-medical cost and indirect cost, stratified by sex, age, clinical stage, therapy and pathologic type in urban and rural areas. Costs per hospitalization were itemized into eight parts to calculate the proportion of each part. All costs were converted to 2016 US dollars (1 USD=6.6423 RMB).

Results

Totally 19,986 cases were included, predominately male. Mean ages of stomach cancer and urban patients were lower than that of esophageal cancer and rural patients. ACI of stomach and esophageal cancer patients were $10,449 and $13,029 in urban areas, and $2,927 and $3,504 in rural areas, respectively. Greater ACI was associated with male, non-elderly patients as well as those who were in stage I and underwent surgeries. Western medicine fee took the largest proportion of cost per hospitalization.

Conclusions

The ACI of stomach and esophageal cancer was tremendous and varied substantially among the population in China. Preferential policies of medical insurance should be designed to tackle with this burden and further reduce the health care inequalities.

Adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin after D2 gastrectomy in Japanese patients with gastric cancer: a phase II study

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemotherapy with XELOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) has been shown to be beneficial following resection of gastric cancer in South Korean, Chinese, and Taiwanese patients. This phase II study (J-CLASSIC-PII) was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility of XELOX in Japanese patients with resected gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with stage II or III gastric cancer who underwent curative D2 gastrectomy received adjuvant XELOX (eight 3-week cycles of oral capecitabine, 1000 mg/m² twice daily on days 1-14, plus intravenous oxaliplatin 130 mg/m² on day 1). The primary endpoint was dose intensity. Secondary endpoints were safety, proportion of patients completing treatment, and 1-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were enrolled, 76 of whom completed the study as planned. The mean dose intensity was 67.2 % (95 % CI, 61.9-72.5 %) for capecitabine and 73.4 % (95 % CI, 68.4-78.4 %) for oxaliplatin, which were higher than the predefined age-adjusted threshold values of 63.4 % and 69.4 %, respectively, and the study therefore met its primary endpoint. The 1-year DFS rate was 86 % (95 % CI, 77-91 %). No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The feasibility of adjuvant XELOX in Japanese patients with resected gastric cancer is similar to that observed in South Korean, Chinese, and Taiwanese patients in the Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin Adjuvant Study in Stomach Cancer (CLASSIC) study. Based on findings from this study and the CLASSIC study, the XELOX regimen can be considered an adjuvant treatment option for Japanese gastric cancer patients who have undergone curative resection.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of apatinib treatment for chemotherapy-refractory advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Apatinib, a third-line or later treatment for advanced gastric cancer (aGC), was shown to improve overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in the phase III trial. Given the modest benefit with high costs, we further evaluated the cost-effectiveness of apatinib for patients with chemotherapy-refractory aGC.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to simulate the disease process of aGC (PFS, progressive disease, and death) and estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of apatinib to placebo. The health outcomes and utility scores were derived from the phase III trial and previously published sources, respectively. Total costs were calculated from the perspective of the Chinese health-care payer. Sensitivity analysis was used to explore model uncertainties.

RESULTS

Treatment with apatinib was estimated to provide an incremental 0.09 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an incremental cost of $8113.86 compared with placebo, which resulted in an ICER of $90,154.00 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis showed that across the wide variation of parameters, the ICER exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of $23,700.00 per QALY which was three times the Gross Domestic Product per Capita in China.

CONCLUSIONS

Apatinib is not a cost-effective option for patients with aGC who experienced failure of at least two lines chemotherapy in China. However, for its positive clinical value and subliminal demand, apatinib can provide a new therapeutic option.

Economic evaluation study (CHEER-compliant): Cost-effectiveness analysis of RAS screening for treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer based on the CALGB 80405 trial

Cetuximab (Cetux)/Bevacizumab (Bev) treatments have shown considerably survival benefits for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the last decade. But they are costly. Currently, no data is available on the health economic implications of testing for extended RAS wild-type (wt) prior to Cetux/Bev treatments of patients with mCRC. This paper aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of predictive testing for extended RAS-wt status in mCRC in the context of targeting the use of Cetux/Bev.Markov model 1 was conducted to provide evidence evaluating the cost-effectiveness of predictive testing for KRAS-wt or extended RAS-wt status based on treatments of chemotherapy plus Cetux/Bev. Markov model 2 assessed the cost-effectiveness of FOLFOX plus Cetux/Bev or FOLFIRI plus Cetux/Bev in extended RAS-wt population. Primary base case data were identified from the CALGB 80405 trial and the literatures. Costs were estimated from West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China. Survival benefits were reported in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated.In analysis 1, the cost per QALY was $88,394.09 for KRAS-Cetux, $80,797.82 for KRAS-Bev, $82,590.72 for RAS-Cetux, and $75,358.42 for RAS-Bev. The ICER for RAS-Cetux versus RAS-Bev was $420,700.50 per QALY gained. In analysis 2, the cost per QALY was $81,572.61, $80,856.50, $80,592.22, and $66,794.96 for FOLFOX-Cetux, FOLFOX-Bev, FOLFIRI-Cetux, and FOLFIRI-Bev, respectively. The analyses showed that the extended RAS-wt testing was less costly and more effective versus KRAS-wt testing before chemotherapy plus Cetux/Bev. Furthermore, FOLFIRI plus Bev was the most cost-effective strategy compared with others in extended RAS-wt population.It was economically favorable to identify patients with extended RAS-wt status. Furthermore, FOLFIRI plus Bev was the preferred strategy in extended RAS-wt patients.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatments for metastatic pancreatic cancer based on PRODIGE and MPACT trials

PURPOSE

Fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GEM-N) have shown a significant survival benefit for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of FOLFIRINOX versus GEM-N for treating metastatic pancreatic cancer based on the PRODIGE and MPACT trials.

METHODS

A decision model was performed to compare FOLFIRINOX with GEM-N. Primary base case data were identified from PRODIGE and MPACT trials. Costs were estimated and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated at West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China. Survival benefits were reported in quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Finally, sensitive analysis was performed by varying potentially modifiable parameters in the model.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis showed that FOLFIRINOX cost $37,203.75 and yielded a survival of 0.67 QALY, and GEM-N cost $32,080.59 and yielded a survival of 0.51 QALY in the entire treatment. Thus, the ICER of FOLFIRINOX versus GEM-N was $32,019.75 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

The GEM-N regimen was more cost-effective compared with the FOLFIRINOX regimen for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer from a Chinese perspective.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of adjuvant chemotherapies in patients presenting with gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy

Background

To analyze and compare the economic outcomes of adjuvant chemotherapy with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (referred to as the XELOX strategy) and of S-1 (the S-1 strategy) for gastric cancer patients after D2 gastrectomy.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime disease course associated with stage II or III gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy. The lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), associated costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated. The clinical data were derived from the results of pilot studies. Direct costs were estimated from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, and the utility data were measured from end-point observations of Chinese patients. Sensitivity analyses were used to explore the impact of uncertainty on the model’s outcomes.

Results

The combined adjuvant chemotherapy strategy with XELOX yielded the greatest increase in QALYs over the course of the disease (8.1 QALYs compared with 7.8 QALYs for the S-1 strategy and 6.2 for surgery alone). The incremental cost per QALY gained using the XELOX strategy was significantly lower than that for the S-1 strategy ($3,502 vs. $6,837, respectively). The results were sensitive to the costs of oxaliplatin and the hazard ratio of relapse-free survival.

Conclusion

The observations reported herein suggest that adjuvant therapy with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin is a highly cost-effective strategy and more favorable treatment option than the S-1 strategy in patients with stage II or III gastric cancer who have undergone D2 gastrectomy.