The Comparison of Cost Effectiveness and Survival Benefit in Chemotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) before and after New Anticancer Drugs (Pemetrexed and Bevacizmab)

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (7) ◽  
pp. 386-395
Author(s):  
Akiyo Terada ◽  
Midori Kimura ◽  
Yoshihisa Okamoto ◽  
Michihiro Kaya ◽  
Michiaki Nakajyo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Anticancer Drugs ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Before And After ◽  
New Anticancer Drugs

Cost-effectiveness of cancer chemotherapy: an economic evaluation of a randomized trial in small-cell lung cancer.

1988 ◽  
Vol 6 (10) ◽  
pp. 1537-1547 ◽  
Author(s):  
P J Goodwin ◽  
R Feld ◽  
W K Evans ◽  
J Pater
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Alternating Chemotherapy

An economic evaluation of a randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin (doxorubicin; Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH), and vincristine alone or alternating with etoposide (VP-16) and cisplatin in extensive small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) was undertaken. A survival benefit of 1.6 months in favor of alternating chemotherapy was associated with an additional cost of $450 (1984 Canadian dollars) per patient. This translated to a cost of $3,370 per year of life gained. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the cost-effectiveness (CEA) of alternating chemotherapy was greatest when treatment was given on an outpatient basis. The results of the evaluation were sensitive to hospitalization rates, but even the most unfavorable analyses revealed the CEA of alternating chemotherapy to be comparable to that of treatments of common nonmalignant diseases. It is concluded that the CEA of alternating chemotherapy for SCLC was favorable when compared with accepted treatments for nonmalignant diseases. The survival benefit seen with alternating chemotherapy was felt to be clinically significant and alternating chemotherapy is recommended as routine therapy for extensive SCLC.

Cost–effectiveness of second-line nivolumab for platinum-treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (18) ◽  
pp. 1301-1309
Author(s):  
Longfeng Zhang ◽  
Xiaofang Zeng ◽  
Hongfu Cai ◽  
Na Li ◽  
Maobai Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life

Aim: To analyze the economic impact of nivolumab and chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who developed disease progression after platinum-containing dual-drug chemotherapy. Materials & methods: The partitioned survival model was used to analyze the cost-utility of two NSCLC treatments by nivolumab and docetaxel. The clinical data resulted from the Phase III clinical trial. The cost parameters were derived from our previous studies, and the utility parameters were derived from the literature. Results: The quality-adjusted life-years of nivolumab and docetaxel were 0.778 and 0.336. The lifetime direct medical expenses of nivolumab and docetaxel were US$44,707.17 and US$12,826.72. The incremental cost–effectiveness ratio was $72,127.71/quality-adjusted life-year. Conclusion: The combination of chemotherapy, nivolumab is not a cost-effective choice in the second-line treatment of NSCLC.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness In The Second-Line Treatment Of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (Nsclc) In The Us

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. A457-A458 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Graham ◽  
H Knox ◽  
LM Hess ◽  
M Jen ◽  
G Cuyun Carter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
The Us
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document