1. |
- Hanna, Catherine R., et al.
(författare)
-
Three Versus Six Months of Adjuvant Doublet Chemotherapy for Patients With Colorectal Cancer : A Multi-Country Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Clinical colorectal cancer. - : Elsevier. - 1533-0028. ; 20:3, s. 236-244
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study widens the transferability of cost-utility results from the SCOT trial showing that administering 3 months of adjuvant, oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is cost-effective and cost saving compared to 6 months from the perspective of all countries recruited to SCOT. The impact on healthcare budgets if the findings are implemented as predicted will amount to savings of at least US$150 million over 5 years. Background: The Short Course Oncology Treatment (SCOT) trial demonstrated non-inferiority, less toxicity, and cost-effectiveness from a UK perspective of 3 versus 6 months of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for patients with colorectal cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of shorter treatment and the budget impact of implementing trial findings from the perspectives of all countries recruited to SCOT: Australia, Denmark, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Patients and Methods: Individual cost-utility analyses were performed from the perspective of each country. Resource, quality of life, and survival estimates from the SCOT trial (N = 6065) were used. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and subgroup analyses were undertaken. Using undiscounted costs from these cost-utility analyses, the impact on country-specific healthcare budgets of implementing the SCOT trial findings was calculated over a 5-year period. The currency used was US dollars (US$), and 2019 was the base year. One-way and scenario sensitivity analysis addressed uncertainty within the budget impact analysis. Results: Three months of treatment were cost saving and cost-effective compared to 6 months from the perspective of all countries. The incremental net monetary benefit per patient ranged from US$8972 (Spain) to US$13,884 (Denmark). The healthcare budget impact over 5 years for the base-case scenario ranged from US$3.6 million (New Zealand) to US$61.4 million (UK) and totaled over US$150 million across all countries. Conclusion: This study has widened the transferability of results from the SCOT trial, showing that shorter treatment is cost-effective from a multi-country perspective. The vast savings from implementation could fully justify the investment in conducting the SCOT trial.
|
|
2. |
- Robles-Zurita, Jose, et al.
(författare)
-
SCOT : a comparison of cost-effectiveness from a large randomised phase III trial of two durations of adjuvant Oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy for colorectal cancer
- 2018
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 119:11, s. 1332-1338
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study is an international, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial assessing the efficacy, toxicity, and cost-effectiveness of 3 months (3 M) versus the usually given 6 months (6 M) of adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer.METHODS: In total, 6088 patients with fully resected high-risk stage II or stage III colorectal cancer were randomised and followed up for 3-8 years. The within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis from a UK health-care perspective is presented using the resource use data, quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), time on treatment (ToT), disease-free survival after treatment (DFS) and overall survival (OS) data. Quality-adjusted partitioned survival analysis and Kaplan-Meier Sample Average Estimator estimated QALYs and costs. Probabilistic sensitivity and subgroup analysis was undertaken.RESULTS: The 3M arm is less costly (-4881; pound 95% CI: -6269; pound -3492) pound and entails (non-significant) QALY gains (0.08; 95% CI: -0.086; 0.230) due to a better significant quality of life. The net monetary benefit was significantly higher in 3M under a wide range of monetary values of a QALY. The subgroup analysis found similar results for patients in the CAPOX regimen. However, for the FOLFOX regimen, 3M had lower QALYs than 6M (not statistically significant).CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 3M dominates 6M with no significant detrimental impact on QALYs. The results provide the economic case that a 3M treatment strategy should be considered a new standard of care.
|
|