Cost-effectiveness analysis of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2): positive advanced breast cancer
The EMILIA trial demonstrated that trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) significantly increased the median profession-free and overall survival relative to combination therapy with lapatinib plus capecitabine (LC) in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. We performed an economic analysis of T-DM1 as a second-line therapy compared to LC and monotherapy with capecitabine (C) from both perspectives of the US payer and society.
We developed four possible Markov models for ABC to compare the projected life-time costs and outcomes of T-DM1, LC, and C. Model transition probabilities were estimated from the EMILIA and EGF100151 clinical trials. Direct costs of the therapies, major adverse events, laboratory tests, and disease progression, indirect costs (productivity losses due to morbidity and mortality), and health utilities were obtained from published sources. The models used 3 % discount rate and reported in 2015 US dollars. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and model averaging were used to account for model parametric and structural uncertainty.
When incorporating both model parametric and structural uncertainty, the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) comparing T-DM1 to LC and T-DM1 to C were $183,828 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and $126,001/QALY from the societal perspective, respectively. From the payer’s perspective, the ICERs were $220,385/QALY (T-DM1 vs. LC) and $168,355/QALY (T-DM1 vs. C).
From both perspectives of the US payer and society, T-DM1 is not cost-effective when comparing to the LC combination therapy at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY. T-DM1 might have a better chance to be cost-effective compared to capecitabine monotherapy from the US societal perspective.
KeywordsCost-effectiveness analysis Trastuzumab emtansine T-DM1 Kadcyla HER2-positive advanced breast cancer
There is no financial support provided by any source for this study. Primary findings of this study were presented in part at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Chicago, IL, June 2nd, 2015.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
QAL received consultation fee from Genentech in the past unrelated to the current study. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
- 4.National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Breast Cancer (Version 1.2016). www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf. Accessed Dec 2015
- 8.Cameron D, Casey M, Press M et al (2008) A phase III randomized comparison of lapatinib plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in women with advanced breast cancer that has progressed on trastuzumab: updated efficacy and biomarker analyses. Breast Cancer Res Treat 112:533–543CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Squires H, Stevenson M, Simpson E, Harvey R, Stevens J (2016) Trastuzumab emtansine for treating her2-positive, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer after treatment with trastuzumab and a taxane: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0386-z
- 10.pCODR Expert Review Committee (pERC) Final Recommendation (2014) Trastuzumab emtansine for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pcodr/pcodr-kadcyla-mbc-fn-rec.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2015
- 11.The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) (2014) Trastuzumab Emtansine. http://www.pbs.gov.au/industry/listing/elements/pbac-meetings/psd/2014-03/trastuzumab-psd-03-2014.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2015
- 16.McDowell M, Fryar CD, Ogden CL, Flegal KM (2008) National Health Statistics Reports, number 10: anthropometric reference data for children and adults: United States, 2003–2006Google Scholar
- 17.Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer price index (CPI). http://www.bls.gov/cpi/. Accessed Jan 9, 2016
- 23.Drug topics red book 2015 (online version). Thompson Healthcare, MontvaleGoogle Scholar
- 27.Burke TA, Wisniewski T, Ernst FR (2011) Resource utilization and costs associated with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy administered in the US outpatient hospital setting. Support Care Cancer 19(1):131–140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 33.Bureau of Labor Statistics. May 2015 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates United States. http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm. Accessed Jan 9 2016
- 36.The World Bank. http://www.data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?end=2015&locations=US&start=1960&view=chart%29. Accessed 1 July 2016
- 37.The World Health Organization (WHO)—cost effectivenes and strategic planning. http://www.who.int/choice/costs/CER_levels/en/. Accessed 1 July 2016
- 44.MirandaRomero P, Marín Gil R (2015) Trastuzumab emtansine in locally advanced or metastatic HER2 positive breast cancer; GENESIS-SEFH drug evaluation report. Farm Hosp 39(3):171–175Google Scholar