Chen Hong-Dou, Zhou Jing, Wen Feng, Zhang Peng-Fei, Zhou Ke-Xun, Zheng Han-Rui, Yang Yu, Li Qiu
Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
West China Biostatistics and Cost-Benefit Analysis Center, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2017 Feb;143(2):361-368. doi: 10.1007/s00432-016-2296-z. Epub 2016 Oct 31.
Apatinib, a third-line or later treatment for advanced gastric cancer (aGC), was shown to improve overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in the phase III trial. Given the modest benefit with high costs, we further evaluated the cost-effectiveness of apatinib for patients with chemotherapy-refractory aGC.
A Markov model was developed to simulate the disease process of aGC (PFS, progressive disease, and death) and estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of apatinib to placebo. The health outcomes and utility scores were derived from the phase III trial and previously published sources, respectively. Total costs were calculated from the perspective of the Chinese health-care payer. Sensitivity analysis was used to explore model uncertainties.
Treatment with apatinib was estimated to provide an incremental 0.09 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an incremental cost of $8113.86 compared with placebo, which resulted in an ICER of $90,154.00 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis showed that across the wide variation of parameters, the ICER exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of $23,700.00 per QALY which was three times the Gross Domestic Product per Capita in China.
Apatinib is not a cost-effective option for patients with aGC who experienced failure of at least two lines chemotherapy in China. However, for its positive clinical value and subliminal demand, apatinib can provide a new therapeutic option.
在一项III期试验中,与安慰剂相比,阿帕替尼作为晚期胃癌(aGC)的三线或更晚期治疗方案,显示出可改善总生存期和无进展生存期(PFS)。鉴于其获益有限且成本高昂,我们进一步评估了阿帕替尼治疗化疗难治性aGC患者的成本效益。
建立马尔可夫模型以模拟aGC的疾病进程(PFS、疾病进展和死亡),并估计阿帕替尼相对于安慰剂的增量成本效益比(ICER)。健康结局和效用评分分别来自III期试验及先前发表的资料。总成本从中国医疗保健支付方的角度进行计算。采用敏感性分析来探究模型的不确定性。
与安慰剂相比,估计使用阿帕替尼治疗可增加0.09个质量调整生命年(QALY),增量成本为8113.86美元,这导致ICER为每QALY 90,154.00美元。敏感性分析表明,在参数的广泛变化范围内,ICER超过了每QALY 23,700.00美元的支付意愿阈值,该阈值是中国人均国内生产总值的三倍。
对于在中国经历至少两线化疗失败的aGC患者,阿帕替尼不是一个具有成本效益的选择。然而,鉴于其积极的临床价值和潜在需求,阿帕替尼可提供一种新的治疗选择。