Shimizu Hisanori, Suzuki Kenichi, Uchikura Takeshi, Tsuji Daiki, Yamanaka Takeharu, Hashimoto Hironobu, Goto Koichi, Matsui Reiko, Seki Nobuhiko, Shimada Toshikazu, Ikeda Shunya, Ikegami Naoki, Hama Toshihiro, Yamamoto Nobuyuki, Sasaki Tadanori
1Department of Hospital Pharmaceutics, School of Pharmacy, Showa University, Tokyo, Japan.
13Department of Pharmacy Services, Showa University Hospital, 1-5-8, Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 142-8666 Japan.
J Pharm Health Care Sci. 2018 Dec 10;4:31. doi: 10.1186/s40780-018-0128-9. eCollection 2018.
We conducted an economic assessment using test data from the phase III TRIPLE study, which examined the efficacy of a 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonist as part of a standard triplet antiemetic regimen including aprepitant and dexamethasone in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving cisplatin-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC).
We retrospectively investigated all medicines prescribed for antiemetic purposes within 120 h after the initiation of cisplatin administration during hospitalization. In the TRIPLE study, patients were assigned to treatment with granisetron (GRA) 1 mg ( = 413) or palonosetron (PALO) 0.75 mg ( = 414). The evaluation measure was the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) assessed as the cost per complete response (CR; no vomiting/retching and no rescue medication). The analysis was conducted from the public healthcare payer's perspective.
The CR rates were 59.1% in the GRA group and 65.7% in the PALO group ( = 0.0539), and the total frequencies of rescue medication use for these groups were 717 (153/413 patients) and 573 (123/414 patients), respectively. In both groups, drugs with antidopaminergic effects were chosen as rescue medication in 86% of patients. The costs of including GRA and PALO in the standard triplet antiemetic regimen were 15,342.8 and 27,863.8 Japanese yen (JPY), respectively. In addition, the total costs of rescue medication use were 73,883.8 (range, 71,106.4-79,017.1) JPY for the GRA group and 59,292.7 (range, 57,707.5-60,972.8) JPY for the PALO group. The CERs (JPY/CR) were 26,263.4 and 42,628.6 for the GRA and PALO groups, respectively, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the groups was 189,171.6 (189,044.8-189,215.5) JPY/CR.
We found that PALO was more expensive than GRA in patients who received a cisplatin-based HEC regimen.
我们使用III期TRIPLE研究的试验数据进行了一项经济评估,该研究考察了一种5-羟色胺3受体拮抗剂作为标准三联抗呕吐方案(包括阿瑞匹坦和地塞米松)的一部分,在接受基于顺铂的高度致吐性化疗(HEC)的患者中预防化疗引起的恶心和呕吐的疗效。
我们回顾性调查了住院期间顺铂给药开始后120小时内所有用于抗呕吐目的的药物。在TRIPLE研究中,患者被分配接受1毫克格拉司琼(GRA)(n = 413)或0.75毫克帕洛诺司琼(PALO)(n = 414)治疗。评估指标是成本效益比(CER),以每例完全缓解(CR;无呕吐/干呕且无需救援药物)的成本来评估。分析是从公共医疗支付者的角度进行的。
GRA组的CR率为59.1%,PALO组为65.7%(P = 0.0539),这些组的救援药物使用总频率分别为717次(153/413例患者)和573次(123/414例患者)。在两组中,86%的患者选择具有抗多巴胺能作用的药物作为救援药物。在标准三联抗呕吐方案中纳入GRA和PALO的成本分别为15,342.8日元和27,863.8日元。此外,GRA组救援药物使用的总成本为73,883.8日元(范围71,106.4 - 79,017.1日元),PALO组为59,292.7日元(范围57,707.5 - 60,972.8日元)。GRA组和PALO组的CER(日元/CR)分别为26,263.4和42,628.6,两组之间的增量成本效益比(ICER)为189,171.6(189,044.8 - 189,215.5)日元/CR。
我们发现,在接受基于顺铂的HEC方案的患者中,PALO比GRA更昂贵。