Suppr超能文献

在意大利,帕唑帕尼对比舒尼替尼作为局部晚期或转移性肾细胞癌一线治疗的更新成本效益分析。

An updated cost-effectiveness analysis of pazopanib versus sunitinib as first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Italy.

机构信息

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

Chair of Oncology, University of Bari 'A. Moro', Bari, Italy.

出版信息

J Med Econ. 2020 Dec;23(12):1579-1587. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2020.1839240. Epub 2020 Nov 5.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of pazopanib versus sunitinib as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) from an Italian National Health Service perspective, considering the evolving Italian landscape in terms of new reimbursement agreements trend.

METHODS

This analysis is an update of the previously published cost-effectiveness analysis to incorporate recent 2019 costs and additional changes regarding drug discounting. A partitioned-survival analysis model with three different health states (progression-free survival, post-progression survival, and dead) was utilized. Outcomes included progression-free life years, post-progression life years, overall life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs calculated for both treatments. Cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of incremental costs per QALY gained and the net monetary benefit (NMB) of pazopanib versus sunitinib. In the base case analysis, a time horizon of 5 years was used and future costs and QALYs were discounted at a 3% annual discount rate. An impact of methodological and parameter uncertainly on base case results was evaluated using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

In the base case, pazopanib had higher QALYs (+0.060) at lower costs (-€5,857) versus sunitinib, hence it dominated sunitinib. At willingness-to-pay thresholds of €30,000 and €50,000 per QALY, the NMB with pazopanib were €7,647 and €8,841 per patient, respectively, versus sunitinib. The probability that pazopanib is cost-effective versus sunitinib was estimated to be 97.5% at a cost-effectiveness threshold of €20,000, 95.4% at a threshold of €30,000, and 90.2% at a threshold of €50,000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness results were robust to changes in key parameter values and assumptions as demonstrated by deterministic sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Pazopanib is likely to represent a cost-effective treatment option compared with sunitinib as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic RCC in Italy.

摘要

目的

从意大利国家卫生服务的角度评估帕唑帕尼与舒尼替尼作为转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)一线治疗药物的成本效益,考虑到新的报销协议趋势下意大利不断变化的环境。

方法

这是对之前发表的成本效益分析的更新,纳入了最近 2019 年的成本以及关于药物折扣的额外变化。使用具有三个不同健康状态(无进展生存期、进展后生存期和死亡)的分区生存分析模型。结果包括无进展生存期、进展后生存期、总生存期、质量调整生命年(QALY)和两种治疗方法的成本。增量成本效益比(ICER)和帕唑帕尼相对于舒尼替尼的净货币效益(NMB)用于评估成本效益。在基准案例分析中,使用了 5 年的时间范围,未来的成本和 QALYs 以 3%的年度贴现率贴现。使用概率和确定性敏感性分析评估了方法和参数不确定性对基准案例结果的影响。

结果

在基准情况下,与舒尼替尼相比,帕唑帕尼的 QALY 更高(+0.060),成本更低(-€5857),因此帕唑帕尼优于舒尼替尼。在支付意愿阈值分别为€30000 和€50000/QALY 时,与舒尼替尼相比,帕唑帕尼的 NMB 分别为每位患者€7647 和€8841。在€20000/QALY 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 97.5%,在€30000 的阈值下为 95.4%,在€50000/QALY 的阈值下为 90.2%。确定性敏感性分析表明,成本效益结果对关键参数值和假设的变化具有稳健性。

结论

与舒尼替尼相比,帕唑帕尼作为意大利转移性 RCC 患者的一线治疗药物,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