Kaye
05-14-2005, 12:50 PM
I am wondering what the implications of the following article are going to mean for those who are Her2+ Did this have anything to do with the announcement by Genentech re. the adjuvant use of Herceptin research? In other words--in the name of economics is there going to be a shift or push into allowing Herceptin to ONLY be given to those before they develop metastatic breast cancer (MBC)? Where will that leave those who have MBC? I am not feeling too good about the results of this analysis and what it may mean to those who are Her2+ If my gut level feelings are 'right,' can anything be done to change what I believe this report suggests--that Herceptin might be taken away as a treatment for those who have stage IV b.c.??? That would be outrageous if it were to happen...
Health economics, trastuzumab Abstract No: 732 Author(s):J. Norum, T. Risberg, J. A. Olsen Abstract:Background: Trastuzumab has shown considerable activity in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) that overexpress HER2. However, significant resources have been allocated to finance this new therapy. Due to ever increasing pressures on health care budgets, economic evaluations are requested in order to compare health effects with costs. We aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of trastuzumab in patients with metastatic breast cancer in a model based cost effectiveness analysis (CEA). Methods: All available data on trastuzumab in MBC presented at the San Antonio breast cancer conference in late 2003 and all data on the Medline in December 2003 were analysed for life years (LY) gained and quality of life (QoL) with regard to the use of this new monoclonal antibody. Randomised studies comparing standard chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab were focused. The costs were calculated according to Norwegian prices as in January 2003. Results: The LY gained ranged between 0.3-0.7 years. The median cost per patient treated was calculated €44,196 yielding costs per life year saved in the range between €63,137 - €162,417 depending on survival gain and discount rate employed. A sensitivity analysis documented the price of trastuzumab and the survival benefit the two major factors influencing the cost-effectiveness ratio. Conclusions: The economic evaluation indicates trastuzumab not cost effective in metastatic breast cancer. Reduced drug costs and/or improved survival may alter the Conclusion:
Health economics, trastuzumab Abstract No: 732 Author(s):J. Norum, T. Risberg, J. A. Olsen Abstract:Background: Trastuzumab has shown considerable activity in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) that overexpress HER2. However, significant resources have been allocated to finance this new therapy. Due to ever increasing pressures on health care budgets, economic evaluations are requested in order to compare health effects with costs. We aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of trastuzumab in patients with metastatic breast cancer in a model based cost effectiveness analysis (CEA). Methods: All available data on trastuzumab in MBC presented at the San Antonio breast cancer conference in late 2003 and all data on the Medline in December 2003 were analysed for life years (LY) gained and quality of life (QoL) with regard to the use of this new monoclonal antibody. Randomised studies comparing standard chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab were focused. The costs were calculated according to Norwegian prices as in January 2003. Results: The LY gained ranged between 0.3-0.7 years. The median cost per patient treated was calculated €44,196 yielding costs per life year saved in the range between €63,137 - €162,417 depending on survival gain and discount rate employed. A sensitivity analysis documented the price of trastuzumab and the survival benefit the two major factors influencing the cost-effectiveness ratio. Conclusions: The economic evaluation indicates trastuzumab not cost effective in metastatic breast cancer. Reduced drug costs and/or improved survival may alter the Conclusion: