• Josh J Carlson, Carolina Reyes, Nina Oestreicher, Deborah Lubeck, Scott D Ramsey, and David L Veenstra.
• Institute for Public Health Genetics, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, United States.
• Lung Cancer. 2008 Sep 1; 61 (3): 405-15.

BackgroundVarious drug therapies are available for treatment of refractory stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but their comparative economic value is unclear.MethodsWe developed a decision analytic model to evaluate the incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of erlotinib, docetaxel, or pemetrexed in a cohort of refractory advanced stage NSCLC patients 60 years of age from a US payer perspective. Mean progression-free and overall survival were assumed equal for the three treatments based on published clinical trials, from which adverse event rates were also derived. Costs and utilities were obtained from publicly available sources. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate uncertainty in the results.ResultsTreatment with erlotinib, docetaxel, and pemetrexed yielded 0.42, 0.41, and 0.41 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), respectively. The slightly increased QALYs for erlotinib compared to docetaxel and pemetrexed resulted from less severe treatment complications and oral vs. IV administration. Total costs were US$ 37,000, US$ 39,100 and US$ 43,800 for erlotinib, docetaxel and pemetrexed, respectively. In the probabilistic sensitivity analyses, erlotinib was cost-saving in 65 and 87% of the simulations compared to docetaxel and pemetrexed, respectively, and had improved QALYs and decreased costs or was cost-effective in 42 and 55% of simulations. Estimates of treatment duration were among the most influential parameters in the analyses.ConclusionsThe results of our analysis suggest treatment of refractory NSCLC with erlotinib is less costly compared with alternative treatments, and suggested improvements in QALYs should be confirmed in controlled clinical trials.

20 keywords...

hide…