Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cost Considerations in the Evaluation and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer

  • Lower Gastrointestinal Cancers (AB Benson, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion Statement

As the cost of cancer care in the United States continues to climb at an alarming rate, it is critically important for the oncology community to begin embracing interventions that provide value to patients and society. This is particularly important in the field of colorectal cancer, where many new high-priced drugs have emerged over the past several years. While adjuvant chemotherapy (FOLFOX and capecitabine) has been shown to fall within accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness, many interventions in the metastatic setting have not. Bevacizumab in the first- and second-line settings as well as EGFR inhibitors across all lines of therapy have been associated with unfavorable cost-effectiveness ratios in several studies conducted in the United States and other countries. A key strategy in improving the cost-effectiveness of CRC treatment in the advanced setting will therefore be to identify predictive biomarkers (e.g., RAS mutation) for therapeutic response to existing drugs as well as drugs in development so that high-priced therapies can be administered to patients most likely to benefit and avoided in those who would not.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Venook A, Niedzwiecki D, Lenz HJ, Innocenti F, Mahoney MR, O'Neil BH, et al. CALGB/SWOG 80405: phase III trial of irinotecan/5-FU/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin/5-FU/leucovorin (mFOLFOX6) with bevacizumab (BV) or cetuximab (CET) for patients (pts) with KRAS wild-type (wt) untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum (MCRC). J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2014;32. This important head-to-head trial comparing first-line cetuximab to bevacizumab in KRAS wild type mCRC patients demonstrates similar survival with either agent. Utilization of data from this trial to conduct a formal cost-benefit analysis from the U.S. health system perspective will therefore be helpful in defining the higher value first-line treatment choice in patients with wild-type KRAS.

  2. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2015. [cited March 23, 2015]; Available from: http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@editorial/documents/document/acspc-044552.pdf.

  3. Yabroff KR, Mariotto AB, Feuer E, Brown ML. Projections of the costs associated with colorectal cancer care in the United States, 2000-2020. Health economics. 2008;17:947–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bach PB. Limits on Medicare’s ability to control rising spending on cancer drugs. The New England journal of medicine. 2009;360:626–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Claxton K, Martin S, Soares M, Rice N, Spackman E, Hinde S, et al. Methods for estimation of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness threshold. Health technology assessment. 2015;19:1–542.

  6. Neumann PJ, Cohen JT, Weinstein MC. Updating cost-effectiveness–the curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold. The New England journal of medicine. 2014;371:796–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Goldberg RM, Sargent DJ, Morton RF, Fuchs CS, Ramanathan RK, Williamson SK, et al. Randomized controlled trial of reduced-dose bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin and irinotecan or infused fluorouracil plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a North American Intergroup Trial. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2006;24:3347–53.

  8. Hillner BE, Schrag D, Sargent DJ, Fuchs CS, Goldberg RM. Cost-effectiveness projections of oxaliplatin and infusional fluorouracil versus irinotecan and bolus fluorouracil in first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;104:1871–84.

  9. Colucci G, Gebbia V, Paoletti G, Giuliani F, Caruso N, Gebbia N, et al. Phase III randomized trial of FOLFIRI versus FOLFOX4 in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: a multicenter study of the Gruppo Oncologico Dell’Italia Meridionale. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2005;23:4866–75.

  10. Tournigand C, Andre T, Achille E, Lledo G, Flesh M, Mery-Mignard D, et al. FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2004;22:229–37.

  11. Tumeh JW, Shenoy PJ, Moore SG, Kauh J, Flowers C. A Markov model assessing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of FOLFOX compared with FOLFIRI for the initial treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. American journal of clinical oncology. 2009;32:49–55.

  12. Schrag D. The price tag on progress–chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. The New England journal of medicine. 2004;351:317–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tappenden P, Jones R, Paisley S, Carroll C. The cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in England and Wales. European journal of cancer. 2007;43:2487–94.

  14. Saltz LB, Clarke S, Diaz-Rubio E, Sheithauer W, Figer A, Wong R, et al. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III study. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2008;26:2013–9.

  15. Whyte S, Pandor A, Stevenson M. Bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer: a NICE single technology appraisal. PharmacoEconomics. 2012;30:1119–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lawrence D, Maschio M, Leahy KJ, Yunger S, Easaw JC, Weinstein MC. Economic analysis of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Journal of medical economics. 2013;16:1387–98.

  17. Shiroiwa T, Fukuda T, Tsutani K. Cost-effectiveness analysis of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Japan. Clinical therapeutics. 2007;29:2256–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Shankaran V, Mummy D, Koepl L, Bansal A, Mirick DK, Yu E, et al. Survival and lifetime costs associated with first-line bevacizumab use in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The oncologist. 2014;19:892–9. This study uses Medicare claims data to estimate total lifetime costs and survival associated with first line bevacizumab use in older patients treated in real-world clinical settings. Findings suggest that bevacizumab provides clinical benefit to older patients, but at a substantial cost.

  19. Goldstein DA, Chen Q, Ayer T, Howard DH, Lipscomb J, Harvey RD, et al. First- and second-line Bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a United States-based cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2015. One of the first formal cost-effectiveness analysis conducted from the United States healthcare system perspective, this study finds that bevacizumab is neither cost-effective in the first nor second line settings when compared to accepted thresholds of cost-effectiveness.

  20. Van Cutsem E, Kohne CH, Lang I, Folprecht G, Nowacki MP, Cascinu S, et al. Cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: updated analysis of overall survival according to tumor KRAS and BRAF mutation status. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2011;29:2011–9.

  21. Douillard JY, Siena S, Cassidy J, Tabernero J, Burkes R, Barugel M, et al. Final results from PRIME: randomized phase III study of panitumumab with FOLFOX4 for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology / ESMO. 2014;25:1346–55.

  22. Meads C, Round J, Tubeuf S, Moore D, Pennant M, Bayliss S. Cetuximab for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Health technology assessment. 2010;14 Suppl 1:1–8.

  23. Schwartzberg LS, Rivera F, Karthaus M, Fasola G, Canon JL, Hecht JR, et al. PEAK: a randomized, multicenter phase II study of panitumumab plus modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) or bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated, unresectable, wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2014;32:2240–7.

  24. Graham CN, Hechmati G, Hjelmgren J, de Liege F, Lanier J, Knox H, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer. European journal of cancer. 2014;50:2791–801.

  25. Au HJ, Karapetis CS, O’Callaghan CJ, Tu D, Moore MJ, Zalcberg JR, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab: overall and KRAS-specific results of the NCIC CTG and AGITG CO.17 Trial. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2009;27:1822–8.

  26. Mittmann N, Au HJ, Tu D, O'Callaghan CJ, Isogai PK, Karapetis CS, et al. Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis of cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: evaluation of National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group CO.17 trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2009;101:1182–92.

  27. Sommeijer DW, Karapetis CS, Zalcberg JR, Tu D, Jonker DJ, Simes J, et al. The relationship between rash, tumour KRAS mutation status and clinical and quality of life outcomes in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab in the NCIC CTG/AGITG CO.17. Acta oncologica. 2014;53:877–84.

  28. Bennouna J, Sastre J, Arnold D, Osterlund P, Greil R, Van Cutsem E, et al. Continuation of bevacizumab after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (ML18147): a randomised phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology. 2013;14:29–37.

  29. Giantonio BJ, Catalano PJ, Meropol NJ, O'Dwyer PJ, Mitchell EP, Alberts SR, et al. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E3200. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2007;25:1539–44.

  30. Wade R, Duarte A, Simmonds M, Rodriguez-Lopez R, Duffy S, Woolacott N, et al. The clinical and cost effectiveness of aflibercept in combination with irinotecan and fluorouracil-based therapy (FOLFIRI) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer which has progressed following prior oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy: a critique of the evidence. PharmacoEconomics. 2015.

  31. Bach P, Saltz L, Wittes R. In cancer care, cost matters. The New York Times; 2012 Oct 14, 2012.

  32. Pollack A. Sanofi halves price of cancer drug zaltrap after sloan-kettering rejection. The New York Times. 2012;8:2012.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Andre T, Boni C, Mounedji-Boudiaf L, Navarro M, Tabernero J, Hickish T, et al. Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as adjuvant treatment for colon cancer. The New England journal of medicine. 2004;350:2343–51.

  34. Cassidy J, Douillard JY, Twelves C, McKendrick JJ, Scheithauer W, Bustova I, et al. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of adjuvant oral capecitabine vs intravenous 5-FU/LV in Dukes’ C colon cancer: the X-ACT trial. British journal of cancer. 2006;94:1122–9.

  35. Twelves CJ. Xeloda in adjuvant colon cancer therapy (X-ACT) trial: overview of efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. Clinical colorectal cancer. 2006;6:278–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Primrose JN, Perera R, Gray A, Rose P, Fuller A, Corkhill A, et al. Effect of 3 to 5 years of scheduled CEA and CT follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer: the FACS randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2014;311:263–70.

  37. Amado RG, Wolf M, Peeters M, Van Custem E, Siena S, Freeman DJ, et al. Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2008;26:1626–34.

  38. De Roock W, Piessevaux H, De Schutter J, Janssens M, De Hertogh G, Personeni N, et al. KRAS wild-type state predicts survival and is associated to early radiological response in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology / ESMO. 2008;19:508–15.

  39. Karapetis CS, Khambata-Ford S, Jonker DJ, O'Callaghan CJ, Tu D, Tebbutt NC, et al. K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer. The New England journal of medicine. 2008;359:1757–65.

  40. Lievre A, Bachet JB, Boige V, Cayre A, Le Corre D, Buc E, et al. KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2008;26:374–9.

  41. Allegra CJ, Jessup JM, Somerfield MR, Hamilton SR, Hammond EH, Hayes D, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: testing for KRAS gene mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2009;27:2091–6.

  42. Van Cutsem E, Kohne CH, Hitre E, Zaluski J, Chang Chien CR, Makhson A, et al. Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. The New England journal of medicine. 2009;360:1408–17.

  43. Shankaran V, Bentrem DJ, Mulcahy MF, Bennett CL, Benson A. Economic implications of Kras testing in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2009; GI Cancer Symposium.

  44. Konigsberg R, Hulla W, Klimpfinger M, Reiner-Concin A, Steininger T, Buchler W, et al. Clinical and economic aspects of KRAS mutational status as predictor for epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Oncology. 2011;81:359–64.

  45. Health Quality Ontario. KRAS testing for Anti-EGFR therapy in advanced colorectal cancer: an evidence-based and economic analysis. Ontario health technology assessment series. 2010;10:1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Westwood M, van Asselt T, Ramaekers B, Whiting P, Joore M, Armstrong N, et al. KRAS mutation testing of tumours in adults with metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis. Health technology assessment. 2014;18:1–132.

  47. Douillard JY, Oliner KS, Siena S, Tabernero J, Burkes R, Barugel M, et al. Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. The New England journal of medicine. 2013;369:1023–34.

  48. Kircher SM, Mohindra N, Nimeiri H. Cost estimates and economic implications of expanded RAS testing in metastatic colorectal cancer. The oncologist. 2015;20:14–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Toffoli G, Cecchin E, Corona G, Russo A, Buonadonna A, D'Andrea M, et al. The role of UGT1A1*28 polymorphism in the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of irinotecan in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2006;24:3061–8.

  50. Pichereau S, Le Louarn A, Lecomte T, Blasco H, Le Guellec C, Bourgoin H. Cost-effectiveness of UGT1A1*28 genotyping in preventing severe neutropenia following FOLFIRI therapy in colorectal cancer. Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques. 2010;13:615–25.

  51. Gold HT, Hall MJ, Blinder V, Schackman BR. Cost effectiveness of pharmacogenetic testing for uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 before irinotecan administration for metastatic colorectal cancer. Cancer. 2009;115:3858–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 2015 ASP Drug Pricing Files. [cited 2015 March 23]; Available from: http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Part-B-Drugs/McrPartBDrugAvgSalesPrice/2015ASPFiles.html.

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Veena Shankaran has received research support through a grant from Amgen.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA

    Veena Shankaran MD, MS

  2. Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA

    Veena Shankaran MD, MS

  3. Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA

    Veena Shankaran MD, MS

Authors
  1. Veena Shankaran MD, MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veena Shankaran MD, MS.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Lower Gastrointestinal Cancers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shankaran, V. Cost Considerations in the Evaluation and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 16, 41 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-015-0354-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-015-0354-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation