Advertisement

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 158, Issue 1, pp 51–57 | Cite as

Palbociclib as a first-line treatment in oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer not cost-effective with current pricing: a health economic analysis of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK)

  • K. Matter-WalstraEmail author
  • T. Ruhstaller
  • D. Klingbiel
  • M. Schwenkglenks
  • K. J. Dedes
Clinical trial

Abstract

Endocrine therapy continues to be the optimal systemic treatment for metastatic ER+HER2 breast cancer. The CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib combined with letrozole has recently been shown to significantly improve progression-free survival. Here we examined the cost-effectiveness of this regimen for the Swiss healthcare system. A Markov cohort simulation based on the PALOMA-1 trial (Finn et al. in Lancet Oncol 16:25–35, 2015) was used as the clinical course. Input parameters were based on summary trial data. Costs were assessed from the Swiss healthcare system perspective. Adding palbociclib to letrozole (PALLET) compared to letrozole monotherapy was estimated to cost an additional CHF342,440 and gain 1.14 quality-adjusted life years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CHF301,227/QALY gained. In univariate sensitivity analyses, no tested variation in key parameters resulted in an ICER below a willingness-to-pay threshold of CHF100,000/QALY. PALLET had a 0 % probability of being cost-effective in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Lowering PALLET’s price by 75 % resulted in an ICER of CHF73,995/QALY and a 73 % probability of being cost-effective. At current prices, PALLET would cost the Swiss healthcare system an additional CHF155 million/year. Palbociclib plus letrozole cannot be considered cost-effective for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer in the Swiss healthcare system.

Keywords

Cost-effectiveness analysis Letrozole Palbociclib Metastatic breast cancer 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the SAKK Coordinating Centre and Nextgenediting for reviewing our manuscript.

Funding

The Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI) supported this work.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declared no potential conflicts of interest related to palbociclib or other drugs mentioned in this article.

Supplementary material

10549_2016_3822_MOESM1_ESM.docx (70 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 69 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Chen L, Linden HM, Anderson BO, Li CI (2014) Trends in 5-year survival rates among breast cancer patients by hormone receptor status and stage. Breast Cancer Res Treat 147(3):609–616. doi: 10.1007/s10549-014-3112-6 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mendes D, Alves C, Afonso N, Cardoso F, Passos-Coelho JL, Costa L, Andrade S, Batel-Marques F (2015) The benefit of HER2-targeted therapies on overall survival of patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer—a systematic review. Breast Cancer Res 17:140. doi: 10.1186/s13058-015-0648-2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cardoso F, Costa A, Norton L, Senkus E, Aapro M, Andre F, Barrios CH, Bergh J, Biganzoli L, Blackwell KL, Cardoso MJ, Cufer T, El Saghir N, Fallowfield L, Fenech D, Francis P, Gelmon K, Giordano SH, Gligorov J, Goldhirsch A, Harbeck N, Houssami N, Hudis C, Kaufman B, Krop I, Kyriakides S, Lin UN, Mayer M, Merjaver SD, Nordstrom EB, Pagani O, Partridge A, Penault-Llorca F, Piccart MJ, Rugo H, Sledge G, Thomssen C, Van’t Veer L, Vorobiof D, Vrieling C, West N, Xu B, Winer E (2014) ESO-ESMO 2nd international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC2) dagger. Ann Oncol 25(10):1871–1888. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu385 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Partridge AH, Rumble RB, Carey LA, Come SE, Davidson NE, Di Leo A, Gralow J, Hortobagyi GN, Moy B, Yee D, Brundage SB, Danso MA, Wilcox M, Smith IE (2014) Chemotherapy and targeted therapy for women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (or unknown) advanced breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol 32(29):3307–3329. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.56.7479 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Finn RS, Crown JP, Lang I, Boer K, Bondarenko IM, Kulyk SO, Ettl J, Patel R, Pinter T, Schmidt M, Shparyk Y, Thummala AR, Voytko NL, Fowst C, Huang X, Kim ST, Randolph S, Slamon DJ (2015) The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone as first-line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-1/TRIO-18): a randomised phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 16(1):25–35. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71159-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beaver JA, Amiri-Kordestani L, Charlab R, Chen W, Palmby T, Tilley A, Zirkelbach JF, Yu J, Liu Q, Zhao L, Crich J, Chen XH, Hughes M, Bloomquist E, Tang S, Sridhara R, Kluetz PG, Kim G, Ibrahim A, Pazdur R, Cortazar P (2015) FDA approval: palbociclib for the treatment of postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 21(21):4760–4766. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1185 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Delea TE, Hawkes C, Amonkar MM, Lykopoulos K, Johnston SR (2013) Cost-effectiveness of lapatinib plus letrozole in post-menopausal women with hormone receptor-and HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Breast Care 8(6):429–437. doi: 10.1159/000357316 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xie J, Hao Y, Zhou ZY, Qi CZ, De G, Gluck S (2015) Economic evaluations of everolimus versus other hormonal therapies in the treatment of HR(+)/HER2(−) advanced breast cancer from a US payer perspective. Clin Breast Cancer 15(5):e263–276. doi: 10.1016/j.clbc.2015.04.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brandle M, Goodall G, Erny-Albrecht KM, Erdmann E, Valentine WJ (2009) Cost-effectiveness of pioglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes and a history of macrovascular disease in a Swiss setting. Swiss Med Wkly 139(11–12):173–184PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Diebold J, Aebi S (2014) Prognostische und prädiktive Marker beim Mammakarzinom. SZO 1:10–14Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tengs TO (2004) Cost-effectiveness versus cost-utility analysis of interventions for cancer: does adjusting for health-related quality of life really matter? Value Health 7(1):70–78CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ubel PA, Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Fendrick AM (2003) What is the price of life and why doesn’t it increase at the rate of inflation? Arch Intern Med 163(14):1637–1641CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Raftery J (2006) Review of NICE’s recommendations, 1999–2005. BMJ 332(7552):1266–1268. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7552.1266 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schwenkglenks M, Lippuner K (2007) Simulation-based cost-utility analysis of population screening-based alendronate use in Switzerland. Osteoporos Int 18(11):1481–1491. doi: 10.1007/s00198-007-0390-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dedes KJ, Matter-Walstra K, Schwenkglenks M, Pestalozzi BC, Fink D, Brauchli P, Szucs TD (2009) Bevacizumab in combination with paclitaxel for HER-2 negative metastatic breast cancer: an economic evaluation. Eur J Cancer 45:1397–1406. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.12.01610.1016/j.ejca.2008.12.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Joerger M, Matter-Walstra K, Fruh M, Kuhnel U, Szucs T, Pestalozzi B, Schwenkglenks M (2011) Addition of cetuximab to first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a cost-utility analysis. Ann Oncol 22(3):567–574. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq431 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matter-Walstra K, Braun R, Kolb C, Ademi Z, Dummer R, Pestalozzi BC, Schwenkglenks M (2015) A cost-effectiveness analysis of trametinib plus dabrafenib as first-line therapy for metastatic BRAF V600-positive melanoma in the Swiss setting. Br J Dermatol. doi: 10.1111/bjd.14152 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Matter-Walstra K, Joerger M, Kuhnel U, Szucs T, Pestalozzi B, Schwenkglenks M (2012) Cost-effectiveness of maintenance pemetrexed in patients with advanced nonsquamous-cell lung cancer from the perspective of the Swiss health care system. Value Health 15(1):65–71. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.1737 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Matter-Walstra KW, Dedes KJ, Schwenkglenks M, Brauchli P, Szucs TD, Pestalozzi BC (2010) Trastuzumab beyond progression: a cost-utility analysis. Ann Oncol 21(11):2161–2168. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq250 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Delea TE, Amdahl J, Chit A, Amonkar MM (2013) Cost-effectiveness of lapatinib plus letrozole in her2-positive, hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in Canada. Curr Oncol 20(5):e371–387. doi: 10.3747/co.20.1394 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sebaratnam DF, Anforth R, Fernandez-Penas P (2015) Treatment specific utility-weightings are needed for cost-utility analysis in metastatic melanoma. Br J Dermatol. doi: 10.1111/bjd.14264 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, Fendrick AM, Weissert WG (2000) Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: in search of a standard. Med Decis Mak 20(3):332–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Durkee BY, Qian Y, Pollom EL, King MT, Dudley SA, Shaffer JL, Chang DT, Gibbs IC, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Horst KC (2015) Cost-effectiveness of pertuzumab in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.62.9105 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lichtenberg FR (2015) The impact of pharmaceutical innovation on premature cancer mortality in Switzerland, 1995–2012. Eur J Health Econ. doi: 10.1007/s10198-015-0725-6 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lakdawalla DN, Chou JW, Linthicum MT, MacEwan JP, Zhang J, Goldman DP (2015) Evaluating expected costs and benefits of granting access to new treatments on the basis of progression-free survival in non-small-cell lung cancer. JAMA Oncol 1(2):196–202. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.0203 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Matter-Walstra
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • T. Ruhstaller
    • 2
    • 3
  • D. Klingbiel
    • 2
  • M. Schwenkglenks
    • 1
  • K. J. Dedes
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of Pharmaceutical Medicine (ECPM)University BaselBaselSwitzerland
  2. 2.Swiss Group of Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) Coordinating CentreBernSwitzerland
  3. 3.Breast CentreKantonsspital St. GallenSt.GallenSwitzerland
  4. 4.Department of GynaecologyUniversity Hospital ZürichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations