Capecitabine (X) vs. bolus 5-FU/LV as adjuvant chemotherapy for patients (pts) with Dukes’ C colon cancer: economic evaluation in an Italian hospital setting
| العنوان: | Capecitabine (X) vs. bolus 5-FU/LV as adjuvant chemotherapy for patients (pts) with Dukes’ C colon cancer: economic evaluation in an Italian hospital setting |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | J. Cassidy, Patel Kk, J.-Y. Douillard, F. Di Costanzo, Louis P. Garrison, Alberto Sobrero, G. Giuliani, Chris Twelves |
| المصدر: | Journal of Clinical Oncology. 24:13518-13518 |
| بيانات النشر: | American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2006. |
| سنة النشر: | 2006 |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | Cancer Research, medicine.medical_specialty, business.industry, Hospital setting, Adjuvant chemotherapy, medicine.medical_treatment, Surgery, Dukes c colon cancer, Capecitabine, Bolus (medicine), Oncology, Internal medicine, Concomitant, Economic evaluation, medicine, business, Adjuvant, medicine.drug |
| الوصف: | 13518 Background: In the X-ACT adjuvant trial, X showed consistent benefits over bolus 5-FU/LV, with at least equivalent disease-free survival (DFS) and an improved safety profile [Twelves et al. 2005]. In addition, X demonstrated superior relapse-free survival (65.5% vs. 61.9% at 3 years follow-up; p=0.0407) and improved covariate-adjusted overall survival (p=0.0208). We used the results from X-ACT to assess the cost-effectiveness of X from the Italian hospital and societal perspective. Methods: Trial-based data were collected on treatment period medical resource use. Unit costs for drug administration, hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and concomitant medications were considered using published sources in Italy. Cost for physician consultation visits, pt time and travel were also considered in the societal perspective. A health-state transition model was used to estimate incremental cost impact and the effectiveness in terms of gains in quality-adjusted life months (QALMs). Costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3.5%. Results: Mean duration of treatment was similar with X and 5-FU/LV; pts received 92% and 93% of planned treatments, respectively. Administration of X required fewer clinic visits per pt (7.4 vs. 28.0 with 5-FU/LV). Acquisition costs of X were higher than 5-FU/LV, approximately 2533 vs. 231€, but this difference was more than fully offset by the difference in administration cost of 5-FU/LV (4338 vs. 152€ for X). Total hospital days for treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and medication costs for treating AEs were higher for 5-FU/LV than X. The cost of emergency room visits for treating AEs and physician consultation did not differ. Compared with 5-FU/LV, X is projected to increase QALMs by 6.5 months, with overall treatment period cost savings of 2234€ for the hospital. From a societal perspective, the cost savings increase to 3976€. These findings show that X is a dominant (cost-saving and more effective) treatment in this setting. Conclusions: X as adjuvant treatment for pts with colon cancer is clinically effective with an improved safety profile vs. 5-FU/LV and is also a dominant choice from an economic perspective. [Table: see text] |
| تدمد: | 1527-7755 0732-183X |
| URL الوصول: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::8c87e0f10960a567a229591b11c47bf3 https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2006.24.18_suppl.13518 |
| رقم الأكسشن: | edsair.doi...........8c87e0f10960a567a229591b11c47bf3 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
| تدمد: | 15277755 0732183X |
|---|