Cost analysis of adjuvant therapy with XELOX or FOLFOX4 for colon cancer

Cost-effectiveness of different chemotherapy strategies for high-risk stage Ⅱ colon cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence and death rates of colon cancer have been increasing year by year. Currently, most guidelines only recommend chemotherapy for stage Ⅱ colon cancer patients with high risk factors. However, treatment decisions are often influenced by resource constraints and cost, so it is important to evaluate the benefits of chemotherapy by cost-effectiveness analysis.

AIM

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage Ⅱ colon cancer.

METHODS

Two Markov models were established using Treeage Pro 2011 software to represent the chemotherapy period and follow-up period. Health outcomes were measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used as the evaluation index of the economic benefits of the treatment strategy, and the sensitivity analysis was performed on the results.

RESULTS

Based on the disease free survival (DFS) curve, patients with stage Ⅱ colon cancer could benefit from chemotherapy (P < 0.0001). Compared with observation alone, the incremental cost of the folinic acid/5-fluorouracil/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) regimen was 27917.36 yuan, the incremental effectiveness was 1.47 QALYs, and the ICER was 18913.88 yuan/QALY. When willingness-to-pay = 216600 yuan, Monte Carlo simulation analysis indicated that the FOLFOX regimen had a cost-effective probability of 100% compared to the observation group.

CONCLUSION

FOLFOX regimen is a more affordable option in China for patients with high-risk stage Ⅱ colon cancer.

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.

Quality of Health Economic Evaluations in Mainland China: A Comparison of Peer-Reviewed Articles in Chinese and in English

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to assess the incidence and quality of reporting of published health economic evaluations in mainland China and compare the quality of peer-reviewed articles in Chinese and English.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted for economic evaluations pertaining to China published from 2006 to 2015 using the PubMed, CBM, CMCC, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases. All studies in English that met the inclusion criteria were included. For studies in Chinese, 200 sampled studies were included according to the random seeds method, and the same number of the most-cited studies in Chinese as those in English were included according to the number of citations and journal grades. Researchers independently assessed the quality of the studies using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

After literature search and screening, a total of 310 studies were identified. The majority of these studies were cost-effectiveness studies (82.26%). Scores among different CHEERS items varied greatly. There was a gap between the average quality scores of the studies published in Chinese and those published in English (49.78 ± 9.31 vs. 82.48 ± 17.69) and between the average quality scores of the included most-cited studies in Chinese and English, which was slightly smaller (54.08 ± 10.27 vs. 82.48 ± 17.69). The methods, results, and discussion sections of studies published in Chinese were of low quality.

CONCLUSION

The quality of reporting of health economic evaluations in mainland China has developed slowly. Most of the included studies were incomplete in the presentation of content, making the results less reliable. It is important to standardize and improve the quality of Chinese health economic research.

Direct costs associated with the management of mucositis: A systematic review

Mucositis is one of the more frequent and costly adverse events following cancer treatment. To evaluate and report the direct economic outcomes associated with the management of mucositis across several cancer treatments we conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Scopus, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Embase were searched electronically and a total of 37 relevant studies were included. The costs attributable to mucositis in the hematopoietic stem cell transplantation setting ranged from 1124,47 US dollars (USD) to 299 214,14 USD per patient. The radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy plus molecular targeted therapy accounted for mucositis costs that ranged from 51,23 USD to 33 560,58 USD per patient. Costs for mucositis in the chemotherapy setting ranged from 4,18 USD to 31 963,64 USD per patient. When the cancer treatment was not specified, costs of mucositis ranged from 565,85 USD to as high as 20 279, 12 USD per patient. Mucositis costs from multimodal therapy ranged from 12,42 USD to 5670,46 USD per patient. The molecular targeted therapy setting included only one study and depending on the healthcare providers' perspective of each country evaluated, mucositis' costs ranged from 45,78 USD to 3484,91 USD per patient. Mucositis is associated with increased resource use, consultations, hospitalizations and extended hospitalizations, leading to a substantial incremental cost that exacerbates the economic burden on the patient, health plan and health system across several cancer treatments and diagnosis. More studies with a prospective evaluation of the economic costs associated with mucositis management are needed.

Pharmaco-economic analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II and III colorectal cancer

Comparison of the costs of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOX) with that of FOLFOX6 (5-fluorouracil/leucovorin [LV] + oxaliplatin) as an adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II or III colorectal cancer has previously been reported. However, there are no reports comparing uracil and tegafur (UFT)/LV with capecitabine. Therefore, the current study compared the costs of adjuvant chemotherapy regimens including CapeOX, FOLFOX6, capecitabine and UFT/LV. The costs of chemotherapeutic drugs and for the prevention and treatment of adverse events were evaluated, as these account for the bulk of the treatment costs. Costs were expressed in Japanese Yen (US dollars). The mean costs of the chemotherapeutic drugs per patient, for an entire course of treatment, were ¥882,632 ($8,406) for UFT/LV, ¥353,290 ($3,365) for capecitabine, ¥1,436,218 ($13,678) for FOLFOX6 and ¥1,255,630 ($11,958) for CapeOX. The mean costs associated with adverse events per patient were ¥2,210 ($21) for UFT/LV, ¥6,749 ($64) for capecitabine, ¥173,432 ($1,652) for FOLFOX6 and ¥107,430 ($1,023) for CapeOX. Therefore, the capecitabine regimen contributes to reducing costs for the management of patients with colorectal cancer who have had surgery.

Inpatient care burden due to cancers in Anhui, China: a cross-sectional household survey

Background

The financial burden of cancers has profound effects and there is a clear need to explore the issue from different perspectives and for different population groups. This study aimed at investigating inpatient cancer care (ICC) burden in Anhui, a typical inland province of China.

Methods

The study collected data through a household survey conducted during April to November, 2014 using cluster-randomized sampling and a structured questionnaire administered face-to-face by trained interviewers.

Results

The survey covered 60,678 urban and rural residents and 318 person-times of ICC during the past year. Age-adjusted annual person-times and days of ICC per thousand population added up to 4.24 and 76.78 respectively and urban residents showed significantly greater admission rates and length of stay than that of rural ones. Total ICC expenditures accounted for 13.30 % of all that of inpatient care for the whole population. Per-case direct and indirect costs of all types of cancers were estimated as 10365.1 and 929.9 RMB. Per-case total cost on ICC at township hospitals was 2142.3 RMB and at province level hospitals, 17133.0 RMB. Significant variations in per-case ICC expenditures also existed between patients with different household income and type of medical insurance systems, but patients suffering from different types of cancers. Out-of-pocket payment due to ICC turned out to be catastrophic for 20.6 % of all cancer patients and 65.2 % for other medical insurance, 45.6 % for enrollees of urban and rural medical insurance, 43.2 % for the 65 to 74 years old. Multi regression revealed statistically significant association between ICC costs and education, reimbursement ratio, household income and level of hospital.

Conclusions

Cancers characterize low incidence, moderate service use and high expenses. There exist substantial differences between subgroups and part of these variations cannot be explained by pathological factors. ICC expenses are catastrophic in nature to a large part of patients. There is a clear need for more effectively regulating cancer-related medical practices and service seeking behaviors.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-2995-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of colon cancer treatments from MOSIAC and No. 16968 trials

AIM

To compare XELOX and FOLFOX4 as colon cancer adjuvant chemotherapy based on MOSAIC and No. 16968 trails from Chinese cost-effectiveness perspective.

METHODS

A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to compare the FOLFOX4 and XELOX regimens based MOSAIC and No. 16968 trial. Five states were included in our Markov model: well (state 1), minor toxicity (state 2), major toxicity (state 3), quitting adjuvant chemotherapy (state 4), and death due to adjuvant chemotherapy (state 5). Transitions among the 5 states were assumed to be Markovian. Costs were calculated from the perspective of the Chinese health-care payer. The utility data were taken from published studies. Sensitivity analyses were used to explore the impact of uncertainty factors in this cost-effectiveness analysis.

RESULTS

Total direct costs of FOLFOX4 and XELOX per patient were $19884.96 ± 4280.30 and $18113.25 ± 3122.20, respectively. The total fees related to adverse events per patient during the entire treatment were $204.75 ± 16.80 for the XELOX group, and $873.72 ± 27.60 for the FOLFOX4 group, and the costs for travel and absenteeism per patient were $18495.00 for the XELOX group and $21,352.68 for the FOLFOX4 group. The base-case analysis showed that FOLFOX4 was estimated to produce an additional 0.06 in quality adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of $3950.47 when compared to the XELOX regimen over the model time horizon. The cost per QALY gained was $8047.30 in the XELOX group, which was $900.98 less than in the FOLFOX4 group ($8948.28). The one way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the utility for the well state and minor toxicity state greatly influenced the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of FOLFOX4.

CONCLUSION

In term of cost-comparison, XELOX is expected to dominate FOLFOX4 regimes; Therefore, XELOX provides a more cost-effective adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer patients in China.