• Análise de custo-efetividade do lapatinibe associado à capecitabina versus capecitabina isolada, e do trastuzumabe associado à capecitabina versus capecitabina isolada no tratamento de câncer de mama metastático no setor privado brasileiro

  • Voltar

Título

Análise de custo-efetividade do lapatinibe associado à capecitabina versus capecitabina isolada, e do trastuzumabe associado à capecitabina versus capecitabina isolada no tratamento de câncer de mama metastático no setor privado brasileiro

Tipo de documento

Apresentação

Descrição

Resumo apresentado na The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR)

Fonte

ISPOR

Ano de publicação

2009

Referência (Vancouver)

Teich V, Passos RBF, Teich N, Canella M. Cost-effectiveness analysis of lapatinib associated to capecitabine versus capecitabine alone and of trastuzumab associated to capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer under the Brazilian private [Internet]. In: ISPOR 2009. Disponível em: https\://www\.ispor. org/heor-resources/presentations-database/presentation/ispor-2nd-latin-america-conference/cost-effectiveness-analysis-of-lapatinib-associated-to-capecitabine-versus-capecitabine-alone-and-of-trastuzumab-associated-to-capecitabine-versus-capecitabine-alone-in-the-treatment-of-metastatic-breast-cancer-under-the-brazilian-private-h

URL

https://www.ispor.org/heor-resources/presentations-database/presentation/ispor-2nd-latin-america-conference/cost-effectiveness-analysis-of-lapatinib-associated-to-capecitabine-versus-capecitabine-alone-and-of-trastuzumab-associated-to-capecitabine-versus-capecitabine-alone-in-the-treatment-of-metastatic-breast-cancer-under-the-brazilian-private-h

Identificador

2009ISPOR060

Title

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Lapatinib Associated to Capecitabine Versus Capecitabine Alone and of Trastuzumab Associated to Capecitabine Versus Capecitabine Alone in the Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer Under the Brazilian Private Health Care System Perspective

Document type

Presentation

Description

Abstract presented at The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR)

Source

ISPOR

Publication year

2009

Reference (Vancouver)

Teich V, Passos RBF, Teich N, Canella M. Cost-effectiveness analysis of lapatinib associated to capecitabine versus capecitabine alone and of trastuzumab associated to capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer under the Brazilian private [Internet]. In: ISPOR 2009. Available from: https\://www\.ispor. org/heor-resources/presentations-database/presentation/ispor-2nd-latin-america-conference/cost-effectiveness-analysis-of-lapatinib-associated-to-capecitabine-versus-capecitabine-alone-and-of-trastuzumab-associated-to-capecitabine-versus-capecitabine-alone-in-the-treatment-of-metastatic-breast-cancer-under-the-brazilian-private-h

URL

https://www.ispor.org/heor-resources/presentations-database/presentation/ispor-2nd-latin-america-conference/cost-effectiveness-analysis-of-lapatinib-associated-to-capecitabine-versus-capecitabine-alone-and-of-trastuzumab-associated-to-capecitabine-versus-capecitabine-alone-in-the-treatment-of-metastatic-breast-cancer-under-the-brazilian-private-h

Identifier

2009ISPOR060

Resumo

Objetivos Desenvolver duas análises separadas de custo-efetividade, avaliando os custos e os resultados de lapatinibe associado à capecitabina (LAP/CAP) versus capecitabina isolada (CAP) ou trastuzumabe associado à capecitabina (TRAST/CAP) versus capecitabina isolada no tratamento de pacientes com câncer de mama metastático HER2 positivo, previamente tratados com trastuzumabe, sob a perspectiva do sistema de saúde privado Brasileiro. Métodos Na ausência de um estudo que compare diretamente LAP/CAP versus TRAST/CAP, foram identificados dois estudos separados, cada um avaliando a eficácia do tratamento combinado versus capecitabina isolada. A gravidade da população e a dosagem de capecitabina no braço combinado diferiram entre os ensaios, tornando uma comparação indireta impossível. Portanto, foram desenvolvidas duas análises independentes de custo-efetividade. Foram considerados apenas os custos médicos diretos, incluindo medicamentos, acompanhamento, progressão da doença e tratamento de eventos adversos. Os resultados foram expressos como tempo até a progressão (TTP). Os Preços Máximos ao Consumidor foram considerados para os custos dos medicamentos e os custos dos procedimentos foram obtidos de tarifas publicadas. Resultados Em um ano, a análise comparativa de LAP/CAP versus CAP resultou em 7,01 meses livres de progressão para LAP/CAP e 5,74 meses para CAP. Os custos médios foram de BRL 130.908 para LAP/CAP e BRL 62.960 para CAP, resultando em um ICER de BRL 53.484 por mês adicional sem progressão. No mesmo horizonte temporal, a análise comparativa de TRAST/CAP versus CAP resultou em 7,86 meses livres de progressão para TRAST/CAP e 6,64 meses para CAP. Os custos médios foram de BRL 179.522 para TRAST/CAP e BRL 70.012 para CAP, resultando em um ICER de BRL 89.852 (USD 64.180) por mês adicional sem progressão. (Índice PPP de 2005: 1 USD = 1,4 BRL) Conclusões A associação de lapatinibe ao tratamento com capecitabina resulta em ganhos no tempo até a progressão de 1,27 meses, com um custo médio por mês adicional sem progressão de BRL 53.484. Em condições semelhantes, embora avaliado em uma população diferente, o trastuzumabe associado à capecitabina resulta em ganhos de 1,22 meses no TTP, com um custo médio por mês adicional sem progressão de BRL 89.852.

Notas

O registro foi originalmente publicado em inglês. A versão em português foi traduzida com o apoio de inteligência artificial.

Abstract

Objetives: To develop two separate cost-effectiveness analyses, evaluating costs and outcomes of lapatinib associated to capecitabine (LAP/CAP) versus capecitabine alone (CAP) or trastuzumab associated to capecitabine (TRAST/CAP) versus capecitabine alone in the treatment of HER2 positive, metastatic breast cancer patients, previously treated with trastuzumab, under the Brazilian private health care system perspective. Methods In the absence of a trial comparing directly treatments with LAP/CAP versus TRAST/CAP, two separate studies were identified, each evaluating the efficacy of the combination treatment versus capecitabine alone. Population severity and dosage of capecitabine in the combined arm differed between trials, so an indirect comparison was not possible. Therefore, two independent cost-effectiveness analyses were developed. Only direct medical costs were considered, including medications, follow-up, disease progression and treatment of adverse events. Outcomes were expressed as time-to-progression (TTP). Maximum Prices to Consumer were considered for drug costs and procedure costs were obtained from published tariffs. Results In one year, the analysis comparing LAP/CAP to CAP resulted in 7.01 progression free months for LAP/CAP and 5.74 to CAP. Average costs were BRL130,908 for LAP/CAP and BRL62.960 for CAP, resulting in an ICER of BRL53,484 per additional month without progression. In the same time horizon, the analysis comparing TRAST/CAP to CAP resulted in 7.86 progression free months for TRAST/CAP and 6.64 to CAP. Average costs were BRL179.522 for TRAST/CAP and BRL70,012 for CAP, resulting in an ICER of BRL89,852 (USD64,180) per additional month without progression. (2005 PPP index 1USD=1.4BRL) Conclusions Associating lapatinib to treatment with capecitabine leads to gains in time-to -progression of 1.27 months, with an average cost per additional month without progression of BRL53,484. In similar conditions, although evaluated in a different population, trastuzumab associated to capecitabine leads to 1.22 month gains in TTP with an average cost per additional month without progression of BRL89,852.

Notes

The record was originally published in English. The Portuguese version was translated with the aid of artificial intelligence.

Continuar navegando