Avaliação económica do erlotinib, docetaxel, pemetrexedo e tratamento de suporte no tratamento de segunda ou terceira linhas de doentes com cancro do pulmão de não pequenas células

Abstract

Aim: Evaluate costs and benefits of erlotinib as 2nd or 3rd line treatment of advanced or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) versus docetaxel, pemetrexed and best supportive care.Materials and methods: Cost-minimisation and cost-utility analysis were performed. Time horizon of two years. Portuguese National Health System (NHS) perspective was applied. Survival and time to progression were obtained from three clinical trials. Base-case analysis: 2nd or 3rd line patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) were obtained from a UK study. Resource consumption was estimated by a Portuguese panel of experts. Costs were calculated according to official Portuguese databases (updated to 2008). Only direct health costs were applied. Annual discount rate: 5%. Sensitivity analysis included different subpopulations, a three year time horizon and a probabilistic analysis.Results: The cost per patient was lower with erlotinib (€26 478) than docetaxel (€29 262) or pemetrexed (€32 762) and higher than best supportive care (€16 112). QALYs per patient were higher with erlotinib (0.250) than docetaxel (0.225), pemetrexed (0.241) or best supportive care (0.186). Erlotinib was dominant in the cost-utility analysis, with a lower cost and a higher efficacy than docetaxel and pemetrexed. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the base-case analysis results.Conclusions: The use of erlotinib instead of docetaxel or pemetrexed could contribute to annual savings for the NHS (substitution rates: 5%-65%) ranging from €135 046-€1 755 602 (docetaxel replacement) and €291 801-€3 793 409 (pemetrexed replacement), with a gain in terms of QALYs.Rev Port Pneumol 2008; XIV (6): 803-827