Outcome and economic implications of proteomic test-guided second- or third-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Extended analysis of the PROSE trial

Hornberger, John; Hirsch, Fred R.; Li, Qianyi; Page, Ray D.

doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.03.006

Cited by 23 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The overall incidence of grade 3 or higher serious adverse events (SAEs) was 22% and 25% in the osimertinib and SOC group, respectively. The occurrence of these SAEs was rare and very similar between the two groups according to the trial, so we chose to simplify the model by multiplying the mean costs of managing SAEs by their overall occurrence . It was assumed that all costs related to SAEs were incurred in the first cycle.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-Effectiveness of Osimertinib in Treating Newly Diagnosed, Advanced EGFR-Mutation-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Wu¹,

Zhang

et al. 2018

The Oncologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The objective of this study was to assess cost and effectiveness of osimertinib in treating newly diagnosed advanced non‐small cell lung cancer with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation from a public payer's perspective in the U.S. and China. Materials and Methods Markov models were developed to compare three treatment strategies: first‐line use of osimertinib, first‐line use of the standard first‐generation EGFR‐tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR‐TKI) followed by the second‐line use of osimertinib, and the standard first‐generation EGFR‐TKI therapy (standard care [SOC]). Clinical data, cost, and utility data were mainly derived from published literatures. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the incremental cost per quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) between the treatments. Results The resultant incremental cost per QALY gained for the first‐line osimertinib versus SOC was $312,903 in the U.S. and $41,512 in China. The incremental cost per QALY for the second‐line osimertinib versus SOC was $284,532 in the U.S. and $38,860 in China. The probability of the SOC strategy being cost‐effective is 1.0 if the willingness to pay threshold is below $150,000/QALY in the U.S. and below $30,000/QALY in China. Conclusion Osimertinib as first‐line treatment could gain more health benefits in comparison with standard EGFR‐TKIs or second‐line use of osimertinib. However, because of the high cost of treatment, the cost‐effectiveness analyses were not in favor of the first‐line use of osimertinib from a public payer's perspective in the U.S. and China. Implications for Practice Osimertinib as first‐line treatment yielded the greatest health outcomes but is not a cost‐effective strategy for lung cancer in the U.S. and China. The price of osimertinib has a substantial impact on economic outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-Effectiveness of Osimertinib in Treating Newly Diagnosed, Advanced EGFR-Mutation-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Wu¹,

Zhang

et al. 2018

The Oncologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The costs related to adverse events were calculated by multiplying the incidence of the serious adverse events by the costs of managing the serious adverse events per event. 29,30 For patients in the stable disease treatment group receiving salvage chemotherapy and supportive care, the health care resource utilization was estimated according to the reported results. 22 The cost of terminal care during the final 30 days of life was extracted from two recent economic evaluations.…”

Section: Cost and Quality Of Life Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-Effectiveness of Osimertinib for EGFR Mutation–Positive Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer after Progression following First-Line EGFR TKI Therapy

Zhang

2018

Journal of Thoracic Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With almost 1.4 million deaths a year, lung cancer is also the most common reason of cancer-related mortality throughout the world (Hornberger et al, 2015). Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately 80% of all lung cancer cases, such as squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and large cell carcinoma (de Marinis and Grossi, 2008; Jemal et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

MiR-186 Inhibited Migration of NSCLC via Targeting cdc42 and Effecting EMT Process

Dong

Jin

Sun

et al. 2017

Molecules and Cells

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, qRT-PCR was employed to identify that miR-186 expression level in NSCLC tissues are highly associated with lymph node metastasis. In addition, through the application of western blotting, luciferase assay and qRT-PCR, it was found that miR-186 targeted 3′UTR of cdc42 mRNA and down-regulated cdc42 protein level in a post-transcriptional manner. Transwell assay indicated that cdc42 partially reversed the effect of miR-186 mimics. Besides, miR-186 was proved to regulate EMT by influencing biomarkers of this process and cell adhesion ability. Thus, miR-186 is a potential target for NSCLC therapy. miR-186 is proposed to be one of tumor-suppressors and may serve as a therapeutic target in NSCLC treatment.

show abstract

Outcome and economic implications of proteomic test-guided second- or third-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Extended analysis of the PROSE trial

Cited by 23 publications

References 27 publications

Cost-Effectiveness of Osimertinib in Treating Newly Diagnosed, Advanced EGFR-Mutation-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Cost-Effectiveness of Osimertinib in Treating Newly Diagnosed, Advanced EGFR-Mutation-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Cost-Effectiveness of Osimertinib for EGFR Mutation–Positive Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer after Progression following First-Line EGFR TKI Therapy

MiR-186 Inhibited Migration of NSCLC via Targeting cdc42 and Effecting EMT Process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About