Health Policy and Administration Department, Faculty of Public Health, University of Indonesia, Depok, West Java, 16424, Indonesia.
Center for Health Economics and Policy Studies (CHEPS), University of Indonesia, Depok, West Java, 16424, Indonesia.
BMC Cancer. 2023 Aug 8;23(1):731. doi: 10.1186/s12885-023-11253-y.
To assess the cost-effectiveness of cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and leucovorin (FOLFOX) or fluorouracil, irinotecan and leucovorin (FOLFIRI) compared to standard chemotherapy alone as a first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with positive KRAS wild type patients in Indonesia.
A cost-utility analysis applying Markov model was constructed, with a societal perspective. Clinical evidence was derived from published clinical trials. Direct medical costs were gathered from hospital billings. Meanwhile, direct non-medical costs, indirect costs, and utility data were collected by directly interviewing patients. We applied 3% discount rate for both costs and outcomes. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to explore the model's uncertainty. Additionally, using payer perspective, budget impact analysis was estimated to project the financial impact of treatment coverage.
There was no significant difference in life years gained (LYG) between cetuximab plus FOLFOX/FOLFIRI and chemotherapy alone. The incremental QALY was only one month, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was approximately IDR 3 billion/QALY for cetuximab plus chemotherapy. Using 1-3 GDP per capita (IDR 215 million or USD 14,350) as the current threshold, the cetuximab plus chemotherapy was not cost-effective. The budget impact analysis resulted that if cetuximab plus chemotherapy remain included in the benefits package under the Indonesian national health insurance (NHI) system, the payer would need more than IDR 1 trillion for five years.
The combination of cetuximab and chemotherapy for mCRC is unlikely cost-effective and has a substantial financial impact on the system.
评估西妥昔单抗联合化疗氟尿嘧啶、奥沙利铂和亚叶酸(FOLFOX)或氟尿嘧啶、伊立替康和亚叶酸(FOLFIRI)与标准化疗相比,作为 KRAS 野生型阳性的转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)患者一线治疗方案的成本效益,在印度尼西亚。
采用Markov模型进行成本效用分析,从社会角度出发。临床证据来自已发表的临床试验。直接医疗成本从医院账单中收集。同时,直接非医疗成本、间接成本和效用数据通过直接采访患者收集。我们对成本和结果都应用了 3%的贴现率。进行概率敏感性分析以探索模型的不确定性。此外,从支付者的角度出发,进行预算影响分析以预测治疗覆盖范围的财务影响。
西妥昔单抗联合 FOLFOX/FOLFIRI 与单独化疗相比,在获得的生命年数(LYG)方面没有显著差异。增量 QALY 仅为一个月,西妥昔单抗联合化疗的增量成本效益比(ICER)约为 30 亿印尼盾/QALY。使用 1-3 个 GDP 人均(21.5 亿印尼盾或 1.435 万美元)作为当前阈值,西妥昔单抗联合化疗的成本效益不佳。预算影响分析结果表明,如果西妥昔单抗联合化疗继续纳入印度尼西亚国家健康保险(NHI)系统的福利包中,支付者在五年内需要超过 10 万亿印尼盾。
西妥昔单抗联合化疗治疗 mCRC 不太可能具有成本效益,并且对该系统具有重大的财务影响。