Suppr超能文献

从意大利国家医疗服务体系的角度看,帕唑帕尼与舒尼替尼作为局部晚期或转移性肾细胞癌一线治疗的成本效益

Cost-effectiveness of Pazopanib Versus Sunitinib as First-line Treatment for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma from an Italian National Health Service Perspective.

作者信息

Capri Stefano, Porta Camillo, Delea Thomas E

机构信息

School of Economics and Management, Università Cattaneo-LIUC, Castellanza, Italy.

Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 2017 Mar;39(3):567-580.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.01.017. Epub 2017 Feb 9.

Abstract

PURPOSE

A prior randomized controlled trial (COMPARZ [Comparing the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Pazopanib versus Sunitinib]) found non-inferior progression-free survival for pazopanib versus sunitinib as first-line therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The present study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pazopanib versus sunitinib as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma from an Italian National Health Service perspective.

METHODS

A partitioned-survival analysis model with 3 health states (progression-free survival, post-progression survival, and dead) was employed. The model time horizon was 5 years. For each treatment strategy, the model generated expected progression-free life years, post-progression life years, overall life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs. Results were reported as incremental costs per QALY gained and the net monetary benefit of pazopanib versus sunitinib. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact on results of methodological and parameter uncertainty.

FINDINGS

In the base case, pazopanib was associated with higher QALYs and lower costs and dominated sunitinib. Using willingness-to-pay thresholds of €30,000 and €50,000 per QALY, the net monetary benefits with pazopanib were €6508 and €7702 per patient, respectively, versus sunitinib. The probability that pazopanib is cost-effective versus sunitinib was estimated to be 85% at a cost-effectiveness threshold of €20,000, 86% at a threshold of €30,000, and 81% at a threshold of €50,000 per QALY. Results were robust to changes in key parameter values and assumptions.

IMPLICATIONS

These results suggest that pazopanib is likely to represent a cost-effective treatment option compared with sunitinib as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Italy.

摘要

目的

一项先前的随机对照试验(COMPARZ[帕唑帕尼与舒尼替尼的疗效、安全性及耐受性比较])发现,在晚期或转移性肾细胞癌患者中,帕唑帕尼作为一线治疗药物,其无进展生存期不劣于舒尼替尼。本研究从意大利国家医疗服务体系的角度,评估了帕唑帕尼与舒尼替尼作为转移性肾细胞癌患者一线治疗药物的成本效益。

方法

采用具有3种健康状态(无进展生存期、进展后生存期和死亡)的分区生存分析模型。模型的时间范围为5年。对于每种治疗策略,模型生成预期的无进展生存年数、进展后生存年数、总生存年数、质量调整生命年(QALY)和成本。结果以每获得一个QALY的增量成本以及帕唑帕尼与舒尼替尼的净货币效益来报告。进行了概率性和确定性敏感性分析,以评估方法学和参数不确定性对结果的影响。

研究结果

在基础病例中,帕唑帕尼与更高的QALY和更低的成本相关联,且优于舒尼替尼。使用每QALY 30,000欧元和50,000欧元的支付意愿阈值,帕唑帕尼相对于舒尼替尼的净货币效益分别为每位患者6508欧元和7702欧元。在每QALY 20,000欧元的成本效益阈值下,帕唑帕尼相对于舒尼替尼具有成本效益的概率估计为85%,在30,000欧元的阈值下为86%,在50,000欧元的阈值下为81%。结果对关键参数值和假设的变化具有稳健性。

结论

这些结果表明,在意大利,对于转移性肾细胞癌患者,与舒尼替尼相比,帕唑帕尼作为一线治疗药物可能是一种具有成本效益的治疗选择。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验