Análise económica do rituximab, em associação com ciclofosfamida, vincristina e...

• Author(s): Braga, P ; Carvalho, S ; Gomes, M ; Guerra, L ; Lúcio, P ; Marques, H ; Negreiro, F ; Pereira, C ; Silva, C ; Teixeira, A
• Date: 2010
• Origin: Repositório Comum
• Subject(s): Análise Custo - Benefício; Ciclofosfamida; Linfoma Folicular; Prednisolona; Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica; Rituximabe; Vincristina
• Document Type: Article
• Language: Portuguese

Description

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate costs and benefits of rituximab in combination with cyclophosphamide/vincristine/prednisolone chemotherapy regimen (R-CVP), in previously untreated patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), compared to CVP alone from a Portuguese National Health System (NHS) perspective. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness (Life Years Gained--LYG) and cost-utility analysis (Quality Adjusted Life Years--QALYs) were performed for a time horizon of 10 years, according to a Markov economic model with three health states (progression free survival, progression and death) and monthly cycles for a population of previously untreated patients with indolent NHL. Data from a phase III clinical trial was used and expanded to include unpublished 53-month median follow-up data. Survival after first-line therapy was estimated from the Scotland and Newcastle Lymphoma Group registry data and utilities were derived from a study in the UK performed in patients with follicular lymphoma. Resource consumption was estimated by a Portuguese expert panel (Delbecq Panel). Costs were calculated from the Portuguese NHS perspective through official data with prices updated to 2008. Only direct medical costs were considered. Costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 5% per annum. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed around assumptions on the time horizon, costs, utilities and excess mortality rate due to progression applied in the base-case analysis. RESULTS: The 10-year base-case analysis showed a lower total cost per patient with CVP alone (€ 85,838) in comparison with R-CVP (€ 87,774). Life expectancy and Quality adjusted life expectancy per patient were higher with R-CVP (6.361 and 4.166, respectively) than with CVP alone (5.557 and 3.438, respectively), representing increases of 0.804 in LYG and 0.728 (8.7 months) in QALYs gained. The incremental cost per LYG was € 2,407 and the incremental cost per QALY gained was € 2,661. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the base-case analysis results. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the combination R-CVP in previously untreated indolent NHL patients improves life expectancy and is a cost-effective alternative to CVP in Portugal.