Cost-Effectiveness of Pazopanib in Advanced Soft-Tissue Sarcoma in Canada

Delea, Thomas E.; Amdahl, Jordan; Nakhai-Pour, Hamid Reza; Manson, Stephanie; Wang, A.; Fedor, N.; Chit, Ayman

doi:10.3747/co.21.1899

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The current article focuses on reporting detailed HRQoL results from the EORTC QLQ‐C30 in line with the requirements established by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Patient‐Reported Outcomes extension . EQ‐5D data were used for cost‐effectiveness analyses reported elsewhere …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health‐related quality‐of‐life results from PALETTE: A randomized, double‐blind, phase 3 trial of pazopanib versus placebo in patients with soft tissue sarcoma whose disease has progressed during or after prior chemotherapy—a European Organization for research and treatment of cancer soft tissue and bone sarcoma group global network study (EORTC 62072)

Coens

Graaf²,

Blay

et al. 2015

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) was an exploratory endpoint in the PALETTE trial, a global, double‐blind, randomized, phase 3 trial of pazopanib 800 mg versus placebo as second‐line or later treatment for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (N = 369). In that trial, progression‐free survival was significantly improved in the pazopanib arm (median, 4.6 vs 1.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.31; P < .001), and toxicity of pazopanib consisted mainly of fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, weight loss, and hypertension. METHODS HRQoL was assessed using the 30‐item core European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality‐of‐Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ‐C30) at baseline and at weeks 4, 8, and 12 in patients who received treatment on protocol. The primary HRQoL endpoint was the EORTC QLQ‐C30 global health status scale. RESULTS Compliance with HRQoL assessments was good, ranging from 94% at baseline to 81% at week 12. Differences in scores on the EORTC QLQ‐C30 global health status subscale between the 2 treatment arms were not statistically significant and did not exceed the predetermined, minimal clinically important difference of 10 points (P = .291; maximum difference, 3.8 points). Among the other subscales, the pazopanib arm reported significantly worse symptom scores for diarrhea (P < .001) loss of appetite (P < .001), nausea/vomiting (P < .001), and fatigue (P = .012). In general, HRQoL scores tended to decline over time in both arms. CONCLUSIONS HRQoL did not improve with the receipt of pazopanib. However, the observed improvement in progression‐free survival without impairment of HRQoL was considered a meaningful result. The toxicity profile of pazopanib was reflected in the patients’ self‐reported symptoms but did not translate into significantly worse overall global health status during treatment. Cancer 2015;121:2933–2941. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health‐related quality‐of‐life results from PALETTE: A randomized, double‐blind, phase 3 trial of pazopanib versus placebo in patients with soft tissue sarcoma whose disease has progressed during or after prior chemotherapy—a European Organization for research and treatment of cancer soft tissue and bone sarcoma group global network study (EORTC 62072)

Coens

Graaf²,

Blay

et al. 2015

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many Canadian cost-effectiveness analyses in cancer have been conducted using the utility scores derived from the U.K. tariffs [28][29][30][31] and, to a lesser extent, the U.S. tariffs 32 obtained from the EQ-5D-3L. The implications of this practice of using non-Canadian tariffs have not been determined, and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health has not yet made an official recommendation on this topic.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Country-Specific EQ-5D-3L Tariffs on the Economic Value of Systemic Therapies Used in the Treatment of Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

Lien

Tam

et al. 2015

Current Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2014, in Canada, a cost-effectiveness analysis of pazopanib in advanced STS was performed [46]. A multistate model to estimate PFS, OS, lifetime STS treatment costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYS) for patients receiving pazopanib or placebo as second-line therapy for advanced STS was done.…”

Section: Pazopanib In the Real Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%