Economic analysis: Erlotinib marginally cost-effective

Feb 16, 2010

Weighing both magnitude of survival benefit and expense, researchers found that the drug erlotinib, which was found to improve overall survival by 2 months in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, is marginally cost-effective. The results of their economic analysis using clinical trial data were reported in a new study published online February 16 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

Natasha B. Leighl, M.D., of the University Health Network in Toronto, Canada, and colleagues performed an analysis of erlotinib treatment in the NCIC Clinical Trials Group BR.21 trial to determine the cost-effectiveness of treating various populations with the drug, a . The researchers also calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for erlotinib treatment in the trial population was $94,638 (2007 Canadian dollar) per life-year gained (95% confidence interval = $52,359 to $429,148).

According to the researchers, this figure exceeds the threshold historically accepted as cost-effective ($50,000 per quality-adjusted life year). The ratio was in the higher range of cost-effectiveness ratios that high-resource countries may consider acceptable. Thus, it may be possible to enhance the cost-effectiveness of this treatment through the clinical and molecular selection of patients for treatment, the authors report.

Subgroup analyses revealed that erlotinib may be more cost-effective in never-smokers or patients with high EGFR gene copy number.

"Ongoing efforts to identify which patients are most likely to benefit from treatment and to make targeted cancer therapies more affordable will serve to make this important treatment option available for patients worldwide," the authors write.

In an accompanying editorial, Scott D. Ramsey, M.D., Ph.D., of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, in Seattle, said the study provided new information to help address some of the questions surrounding the drug's use. Although the study's findings are unlikely to sway any policies, it does provide information on the potential economic impact of biomarker-guided treatment with erlotinib.

"The unwillingness of public and private health systems and providers in the United States to consider costs relative to benefits in decisions about access to these products presents a clear signal to drug manufacturers," he writes. "It also presents the rest of the world with a need for information that identifies patients for whom the amount of benefit of therapies such as can support a valid argument for their use."

Explore further: Genomic analysis of prostate cancer indicates best course of action after surgery

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Generation of tanners see spike in deadly melanoma

7 hours ago

(AP)—Stop sunbathing and using indoor tanning beds, the acting U.S. surgeon general warned in a report released Tuesday that cites an alarming 200 percent jump in deadly melanoma cases since 1973.

Penn team makes cancer glow to improve surgical outcomes

7 hours ago

The best way to cure most cases of cancer is to surgically remove the tumor. The Achilles heel of this approach, however, is that the surgeon may fail to extract the entire tumor, leading to a local recurrence.

Cancer: Tumors absorb sugar for mobility

19 hours ago

Cancer cells are gluttons. We have long known that they monopolize large amounts of sugar. More recently, it became clear that some tumor cells are also characterized by a series of features such as mobility or unlikeliness ...

User comments : 0