Cost-effectiveness of olaparib vs routine surveillance in the maintenance setting for patients with BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer after response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in Singapore

Olaparib as first line in BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian carcinoma: Is it cost-effective in Spain?

“…The researchers also developed a PSA, which demonstrated that olaparib was associated with an 81% probability of being cost-effective, considering a threshold of SGD50,000/QALY (around €33,000/QALY). In addition, their results were most sensitive to variations in the discount rate and mortality risk in long-term survivors [41]. These conclusions are in agreement with our results [20,21].…”

“…However, the majority of these evaluations included patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent OC [37][38][39]. Regarding the recent indication of olaparib in first line, two economic evaluations analyzed the cost-effectiveness of olaparib; one developed in Italy [40] and the other in Singapore [41]. The Italian economic evaluation analyzed the cost-effectiveness of olaparib maintenance therapy compared with no maintenance therapy, according the SOLO1 trial results, from the Italian National Health Service perspective.…”

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Germline and Somatic BRCA Testing in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer

“…Studies have shown that germline BRCA testing is cost-effective with regard to cancer risk management in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer [19,20] and first-degree relatives [21]. However, the cost-effectiveness of PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy varied under different conditions in different studies [22][23][24][25][26]. In some studies, olaparib maintenance therapy was considered cost-effective for patients with ovarian cancer when compared with no maintenance therapy [25,26].…”

“…However, the cost-effectiveness of PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy varied under different conditions in different studies [22][23][24][25][26]. In some studies, olaparib maintenance therapy was considered cost-effective for patients with ovarian cancer when compared with no maintenance therapy [25,26].…”