PMID- 26442575
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20161017
LR  - 20181202
IS  - 1941-837X (Electronic)
IS  - 1369-6998 (Linking)
VI  - 19
IP  - 2
DP  - 2016
TI  - Comparative net cost impact of the utilization of panitumumab versus cetuximab 
      for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in Canada.
PG  - 135-47
LID - 10.3111/13696998.2015.1105230 [doi]
AB  - OBJECTIVE: Clinical practice guidelines support the use of the epidermal growth 
      factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors panitumumab and cetuximab for the treatment of 
      metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after failure of other chemotherapy regimens, 
      based on significant clinical benefits in patients with wild-type KRAS. The 
      purpose of the analysis was to compare provincial hospital costs when using 
      panitumumab vs cetuximab with or without irinotecan in this patient population 
      using a Net Impact Analysis (NIA) approach. METHODS: The NIA determined the total 
      per patient cost of the reimbursed regimens of panitumumab vs cetuximab in 
      British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec. Utilization of 
      healthcare resources related to EGFR inhibitor infusions, follow-up monitoring, 
      and treatment of adverse events (AEs) were also included. Healthcare resource use 
      including drugs, medical supplies, laboratory testing, oncology infusion time, 
      and healthcare professionals' time was obtained through expert consultation and 
      the use was then multiplied by the province-specific cost of each resource. 
      Numerous sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Based on the dosing 
      regimens in place in each province, the total annual per patient cost of 
      panitumumab ranged from $22,203-$32,600, while the total annual per patient cost 
      of cetuximab treatment varied from $30,321-$40,908. Treatment with panitumumab 
      resulted in lower costs in all cost categories including drug acquisition, 
      infusion preparation/administration, patient monitoring, and AE management. Per 
      patient savings with panitumumab ranged from a low of $3815 in British Columbia 
      to a high of $10,603 in Ontario. In sensitivity analyses, panitumumab remained 
      cost saving in all scenarios where the savings ranged from $150-$16,006 per 
      patient. CONCLUSIONS: Treating chemorefractory mCRC patients with panitumumab 
      rather than cetuximab reduced healthcare resource costs. Provincial healthcare 
      savings achieved with the use of panitumumab could potentially be re-allocated to 
      other cancer treatments, although further study would be needed to validate this 
      assumption.
FAU - Pettigrew, M
AU  - Pettigrew M
AD  - a a Symbiose Partenariat Strategique Inc , Montreal , Quebec , Canada.
FAU - Kavan, P
AU  - Kavan P
AD  - b b Jewish General Hospital , Oncology , Montreal , Quebec , Canada.
FAU - Surprenant, L
AU  - Surprenant L
AD  - c c St Mary's Hospital Centre , Oncology , Montreal , Quebec , Canada.
FAU - Lim, H J
AU  - Lim HJ
AD  - d d British Columbia Cancer Agency , Medical Oncology, Vancouver, BC , Canada.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
DEP - 20151111
PL  - England
TA  - J Med Econ
JT  - Journal of medical economics
JID - 9892255
RN  - 0 (Antibodies, Monoclonal)
RN  - 0 (Antineoplastic Agents)
RN  - 6A901E312A (Panitumumab)
RN  - PQX0D8J21J (Cetuximab)
SB  - IM
MH  - Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage/*economics
MH  - Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage/*economics
MH  - Canada
MH  - Cetuximab/administration & dosage/*economics
MH  - Colorectal Neoplasms/*drug therapy/pathology
MH  - *Cost-Benefit Analysis
MH  - Female
MH  - Humans
MH  - Male
MH  - Neoplasm Metastasis/*drug therapy
MH  - Panitumumab
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - Cetuximab
OT  - Economic analysis
OT  - Net cost impact
OT  - Panitumumab
OT  - Reimbursement
OT  - mCRC
EDAT- 2015/10/08 06:00
MHDA- 2016/10/19 06:00
CRDT- 2015/10/08 06:00
PHST- 2015/10/08 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2015/10/08 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2016/10/19 06:00 [medline]
AID - 10.3111/13696998.2015.1105230 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - J Med Econ. 2016;19(2):135-47. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2015.1105230. Epub 2015 Nov 
      11.