Cost–utility analysis of chemotherapy in symptomatic advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer

When using chemotherapy in patients with a short life expectancy, outcomes such as symptom improvement or clinical benefit receive increasing attention. Outcomes of subjective benefit to the patient can be rated as a utility in order to perform health economic analyses and comparisons with other treatment conditions. A cost–utility analysis has been performed alongside a prospective randomised clinical trial comparing single agent gemcitabine to cisplatin-based chemotherapy in symptomatic advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer patients. Global quality of life as well as resource utilisation data were collected during first-line chemotherapy for both treatment arms. Incremental costs, utilities and cost–utility ratio were calculated. Per patient, an incremental cost of \#8364;1,522 was obtained for gemcitabine compared to cisplatin–vindesine, mainly as a consequence of the direct cost of the cytotoxic drugs. When combined with utilities, this resulted in an incremental cost–utility ratio for gemcitabine of \#8364;13,836 per quality-adjusted life year gained. In conclusion, although the least expensive strategy is cisplatin–vindesine, the greater clinical benefit of gemcitabine, resulting in an acceptable incremental cost–utility ratio as compared with other healthcare interventions, balances its higher cost. The gains in subjective outcome achieved with palliative chemotherapy are critical from both a clinical and a health economic point of view.

[1]  W. F. Van den Bogaert,et al.  CHART in lung cancer: economic evaluation and incentives for implementation. , 2005, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[2]  C. Dooms,et al.  Treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer , 2004 .

[3]  R. Ramlau,et al.  Randomized, multinational, phase III study of docetaxel plus platinum combinations versus vinorelbine plus cisplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: the TAX 326 study group. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[4]  C. Dooms,et al.  Influence of cisplatin-use, age, performance status and duration of chemotherapy on symptom control in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: detailed symptom analysis of a randomised study comparing cisplatin-vindesine to gemcitabine. , 2003, Lung cancer.

[5]  J. Crowley,et al.  Economic analysis of vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. , 2002, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[6]  J. Crowley,et al.  Quality of life in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: Results of a Southwest Oncology Group randomized trial , 2002, Quality of Life Research.

[7]  K. Nackaerts,et al.  Clinical-benefit response in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A multicentre prospective randomised phase III study of single agent gemcitabine versus cisplatin-vindesine. , 2001, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[8]  P J Neumann,et al.  Systematic overview of cost-utility assessments in oncology. , 2000, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  D. Coyle,et al.  Decision framework for chemotherapeutic interventions for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[10]  Tammy O. Tengs,et al.  One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. , 2000, Medical care.

[11]  M. Jiroutek,et al.  Comparison of survival and quality of life in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with two dose levels of paclitaxel combined with cisplatin versus etoposide with cisplatin: results of an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group trial. , 2000, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[12]  R. Stahel,et al.  Single-agent gemcitabine: an active and better tolerated alternative to standard cisplatin-based chemotherapy in locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. , 1999, Lung cancer.

[13]  S. Barni,et al.  Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A randomized phase III study of the Italian Lung Cancer Project. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  F. Shepherd,et al.  Economic issues in lung cancer: a review. , 1998, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[15]  J. Fernberg,et al.  Economic evaluation of gemcitabine single agent therapy compared with standard treatment in stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer , 1998, Medical oncology.

[16]  G. Giaccone,et al.  Randomized study of paclitaxel-cisplatin versus cisplatin-teniposide in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Lung Cancer Cooperative Group. , 1998, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  D. Coyle,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis in oncology. , 1998, Praxis.

[18]  J. Whang‐Peng,et al.  Gemcitabine versus the combination of cisplatin and etoposide in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer in a phase II randomized study. , 1997, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  O. Brodin,et al.  Chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis using updated data on individual patients from 52 randomised clinical trials , 1995 .

[20]  A S Detsky,et al.  How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. , 1992, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[21]  J. Holland,et al.  Single-agent versus combination chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: the cancer and leukemia group B (study 9730). , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[22]  A. Gafni,et al.  Which cancer clinical trials should be considered for economic evaluation? Selection criteria from the National Cancer Institute of Canada's Working Group on Economic Analysis. , 2003, Chronic diseases in Canada.

[23]  A. Messori,et al.  Quality of life and utility in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Quality-of-life Study Group of the Master 2 Project in Pharmacoeconomics. , 2001, PharmacoEconomics.

[24]  N. Waugh,et al.  A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer. , 2001, Health technology assessment.

[25]  A. Carrato,et al.  Randomized phase III study of gemcitabine-cisplatin versus etoposide-cisplatin in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[26]  P. Wingo,et al.  Cancer statistics, 1997 , 1997, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[27]  M. Ranson,et al.  Chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer. , 1995, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.