Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Economic Evaluation for Palbociclib Plus Fulvestrant vs Ribociclib Plus Fulvestrant and Abemaciclib Plus Fulvestrant in Endocrine-Resistant Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer in Italy.
| Content Provider | Europe PMC |
|---|---|
| Author | Colombo, Giorgio Lorenzo Valentino, Maria Chiara Fabi, Alessandra Dieci, Maria Vittoria Caruggi, Mauro Bruno, Giacomo Matteo Lombardi, Gloria Di Matteo, Sergio |
| Copyright Year | 2023 |
| Abstract | BackgroundTo date, no study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of palbociclib (PAL) plus fulvestrant (FUL) vs ribociclib (RIB) plus FUL and abemaciclib (ABM) plus FUL in Italy. Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the three cyclin-dependent 4/6 kinase inhibitors in combination with endocrine therapies for the management of postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- advanced or metastatic breast cancer in Italy was developed.Material and MethodsTo assess the cost-effectiveness of PAL plus FUL vs RIB plus FUL and ABM plus FUL, a cost-minimization has been carried out with a conservative scenario considering three CDK4/6 inhibitors with equal effectiveness in terms of overall survival (OS) (MAIC, Rugo et al 2021). Adverse events (AEs) associated with all therapies were obtained from clinical trials. Ad-hoc analysis was performed to estimate the cost-effectiveness considering the quality-of-life (QoL) data (Lloyd et al 2006).ResultsCost-minimization inputs were drugs, visits and exams, AE monitoring and best supportive care (BSC) before the progression state, active and BSC in the progression and terminal phase of the last two weeks of life. Given the comparability of PAL, RIB and ABM in terms of efficacy, this analysis demonstrated slight economic savings over a lifetime for PAL. Results showed saving per patient of €305 (lifetime) when PAL is compared with RIB; for PAL vs ABM a saving of €243 (lifetime) in a conservative scenario. Results of a budget impact analysis showed a potential savings of €319,563 for PAL vs RIB and €297,544 for PAL vs ABM. When QoL data were considered, results may favor PAL due to the lower impact of AE with savings and improvement in the QoL related to fewer AE.ConclusionFrom the Italian perspective, a cost-saving profile associated with the use of PAL+FUL for the management of advanced/metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer compared to RIB+FUL and ABM+FUL emerged. |
| Page Count | 12 |
| ISSN | 11766336 |
| Journal | Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management |
| Volume Number | 19 |
| PubMed Central reference number | PMC10066701 |
| PubMed reference number | 37013197 |
| e-ISSN | 1178203X |
| DOI | 10.2147/TCRM.S391769 |
| Language | English |
| Publisher | Dove |
| Publisher Date | 2023-03-28 |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Rights License | This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). © 2023 Colombo et al. |
| Subject Keyword | cost effectiveness cost-minimization metastatic breast cancer palbociclib ribociclib abemaciclib second-line endocrine therapy Italy |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
| Subject | Safety Research Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics Pharmacology (medical) Chemical Health and Safety |