domingo, 19 de agosto de 2018

Cost-effectiveness and safety of the molecular targeted drugs afatinib, gefitinib and erlotinib as first-line treatments for patients with advanced... - PubMed - NCBI

Cost-effectiveness and safety of the molecular targeted drugs afatinib, gefitinib and erlotinib as first-line treatments for patients with advanced... - PubMed - NCBI



 2018 Aug;9(2):201-206. doi: 10.3892/mco.2018.1640. Epub 2018 May 30.

Cost-effectiveness and safety of the molecular targeted drugs afatinib, gefitinib and erlotinib as first-line treatments for patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

Abstract

Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), including gefitinib, erlotinib and afatinib are standard first-line treatments for EGFR gene mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer. The present study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of using erlotinib, afatinib or gefitinib. The safety of EGFR-TKIs was also investigated. Expected costs were calculated based on data from patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer who were treated with gefitinib, erlotinib or afatinib. Literature was collected to obtain the necessary clinical information for calculating the probability and the validity of each chemotherapy. Median survival time (MST) was used to evaluate the therapeutic effect of the regimens. The cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated using expected costs and MSTs for the three regimens. The cost-effectiveness ratio per month was JPY 386,859.4/MST for afatinib, JPY 264,788.7/MST for gefitinib and JPY 397,039.9/MST for erlotinib. Significant differences were observed between the three groups (p<0.001). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of gefitinib compared with afatinib per month was JPY 122,070.7/MST. The ICER of gefitinib compared with erlotinib was JPY -69,605.9/MST. Adverse effects of Grade 3 and higher, including diarrhoea (28.6%) and paronychia (14.3%) were observed in the afatinib treatment group. Paronychia (23.1%) was observed in the erlotinib treatment group, while none were observed in the gefitinib treatment group. These findings demonstrate that gefitinib is more cost effective in comparison with the afatinib and erlotinib regimens, although the afatinib and erlotinib regimens were well-tolerated and produce sufficient effects.

KEYWORDS:

adverse event; afatinib; cost-effectiveness; erlotinib; gefitinib; non-small-cell lung cancer

PMID:
 
30101022
 
PMCID:
 
PMC6083407
 
DOI:
 
10.3892/mco.2018.1640

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario