Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the use of targeted therapy and chemotherapy in the first- and second-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer

Трякин, А. А.; Балунов, П. А.

doi:10.21518/2079-701x-2018-19-50-55

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…- По результатам рандомизированных контролируемых исследований, мВБП при использовании различных режимов составляет: FOLFOX -9,3 мес, FOLFOX + панитумумаб -12,9 мес, FOLFIRI -4,67 мес, FOLFIRI + цетуксимаб -12 мес, FOLFOX + бевацизумаб -10 мес, FOLFIRI + афлиберцепт -6,9 мес, FOLFOXIRI -12,3 мес, монотерапия регорафенибом -1,9 мес [12].…”

Section: расчет показателя «затраты-эффективность» / Calculation Of Cost-effectiveness Ratiounclassified

“…Однако именно наиболее современные таргетные и иммунные противоопухолевые препараты существенно увеличили экономическую нагрузку на систему здравоохранения. С учетом высокой цены новых препаратов выбор оптимальной последовательности линий противоопухолевого лекарственного лечения этого заболевания крайне актуален [10][11][12][13].…”

Section: введение / Introductionunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the effectiveness of therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: to perform a pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the effectiveness of therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) based on real practical data on medical help for patients with this disease.Material and methods. The authors performed a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis and the calculation of resource consumption in the application of several options of chemotherapy for mCRC: FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, and FOLFOXIRI; targeted therapy: FOLFOX + bevacizumab, FOLFOX + panitumumab, FOLFIRI + cetuximab, FOLFIRI + aflibercept, regorafenib monotherapy.Results. The cost-effectiveness parameter, calculated as a ratio of the cost of therapy to the median survival without progression, for chemotherapeutic schemes varied from 108 to 167 thousand rubles and for the targeted therapy schemes – from 223 to 930 thousand rubles. The calculation of resource consumption showed that in the case of a limited budget, 100% of patients can be treated by FOLFOX scheme, or 26% of patients by FOLFOX + panitumumab, or 47% of patients by FOLFOX + bevacizumab; and 100% of patients by FOLFIRI scheme or 11.5% of patients by FOLFIRI + cetuximab (aflibercept). Besides, it was established that in the case of a similar budget, 100% of patients with mCRC can be treated by chemotherapy schemes or a limited number of patients with regorafenib.Conclusion. The cost of targeted therapy significantly exceeds the cost of chemotherapeutic schemes. Still, considering the gross domestic product per capita in the Russian Federation, they can be an economically feasible investment and the optimum option of therapy

show abstract

Section: расчет показателя «затраты-эффективность» / Calculation Of Cost-effectiveness Ratiounclassified

Section: введение / Introductionunclassified

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the effectiveness of therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparative pharmacoeconomic analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment

Petukhova

Елисеева

Апанасевич

et al. 2021

Bulletin of the Russian Military Medical Academy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Every year, the pharmacological market offers new medicines to increase the survival rate and improve the quality of life of patients with cancer. However, while significantly exceeding the cost of existing methods of pharmacotherapy, new technologies often lead to only a small increased efficiency. Budget resources of health care dictate the need for a rational choice of pharmacotherapeutic options for malignant neoplasms that meet the principles of ensuring maximum results and accessibility for the entire population. An important role in solving this problem is played by such a direction of pharmacoeconomic analysis as the cost-effectiveness method. Colorectal cancer is one of the three oncological diseases that cause the greatest socio-economic burden for the state, which is associated with the highest costs of the Russian Federation health care system. Concurrently, in the last decade, a much more favorable prognosis has been identified for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer due to the development of effective approaches to antitumor pharmacotherapy. Conducting a pharmacoeconomic review that takes into account both clinical and economic indicators when using classic chemotherapy regimens and new targeted drugs will determine the effectiveness of finances that are spent to combat this malignancy. Additionally, the need to further individualize the therapy of patients suffering from metastatic colorectal cancer and lower prices for modern antitumor drugs is undeniable.

show abstract

Evaluation of Overall Survival Rate of Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Depending on Choice of Treatment, Location of Primary Focus and RAS Genes Mutation Status

Shiryayev

Cheporov

Malashenkо

et al. 2023

I.P. Pavlov Russian Medical Biological Herald

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION: Morbidity with colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Yaroslavl region (YR) accounts for 13.4% of all cases identified in 2021, and ranks third after skin cancer and lung cancer. In the mortality structure, CRC makes 14.2% and is the second leading cause of death. Locally advanced and metastatic forms of the tumor process are identified in more than half the patients. AIM: To evaluate the overall survival rate of patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) in the territory of the YR depending on the volume of surgical treatment, chemo- and targeted treatment regimens and the presence of RAS genes mutations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On the base of the Yaroslavl Regional Clinical Oncology Hospital, the data of 291 patients with mCRC who underwent treatment in the period from 2015 to 2022, were analyzed. The mean age of patients was 63.0 8.6 years. There were 52% of men (n = 151), and 48% of women (n = 140). The patients were divided to two groups depending on the status of RAS genes mutations: group I (n = 145) patients with the identified mutation; group II (n = 146) patients with wild-type mutation. The patients were additionally divided to three subgroups depending on the type of treatment: subgroup A (58.1%; n = 169) removal of the primary focus (PF) in combination with antitumor chemotherapy (CT); subgroup B (31.6%; n = 92) CT without surgical treatment; subgroup C (10.3%; n = 30) removal of the PF and resection of liver metastases in combination with CT. RESULTS: The overall survival rate (OSR) depending on the type of treatment was in subgroup A 21.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 18.6-23.3) months; in subgroup B 11.2 (95% CI 9.912.5) months; in subgroup C 21.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 18.623.3) months. OSR with RAS mutation: in subgroup 1A 17.7 (95% CI 13.821.7) months; in subgroup IB 11.1 (95% CI 8.313.2) months; in subgroup IC 13.2 (95% CI 4.0722.7) months. OSR with wild-type mutation: subgroup IIA: Cetuximab 33.6 (95% CI 26.740.4) months, Panitumumab 23.8 (95% CI 19.727.9) months (p = 0.01); subgroup IIB: Cetuximab 22.3 (95% CI 17.027.5) months, Panitumumab 15.2 (95% CI 10.719.6) months (p = 0.012); subgroup IIC: Cetuximab 27.5 (95% CI 17.837.1) months, Panitumumab 38.8 (95% CI 13.963.6) months (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mutation in RAS genes, the best OSR values were noted in case of surgical removal of the PF in combination with palliative drug therapy. In patients with wild-type mutation of RAS genes the best OSR parameters were recorded in surgical removal of the PF and of metastases in the liver in combination with palliative polyCT and Panitumumab. The lowest OSR was found in the subgroup of patients with use of CT without surgical treatment in the presence of RAS mutation. High OSR parameters were found with mutation in G13codon, and with use of surgical treatment with mutation in A146 codon.

show abstract

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the use of targeted therapy and chemotherapy in the first- and second-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the effectiveness of therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the effectiveness of therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

Comparative pharmacoeconomic analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment

Evaluation of Overall Survival Rate of Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Depending on Choice of Treatment, Location of Primary Focus and RAS Genes Mutation Status

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About