Abstract
This retrospective study compares the economic superiority of palbociclib versus everolimus for advanced and recurrent breast cancer. Furthermore, we investigated the safety and treatment continuity of palbociclib and everolimus regimens. Expected costs were calculated based on data from patients with advanced and recurrent breast cancer who were treated with palbociclib and everolimus. The progression-free survival (PFS) from the PALOMA-3 clinical trial and BOLERO-2 clinical trial was used to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of the regimens. The cost-effectiveness ratio of each chemotherapy agent was calculated by dividing the expected cost by the progression-free survival (PFS). The cost-effectiveness ratio per month was JPY 391,551.3/PFS for palbociclib and JPY 488,690.5/PFS for everolimus (p=0.627). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per month of everolimus to palbociclib was JPY 100,133.7/PFS. For patients receiving everolimus, adverse drug reactions included stomatitis (77.3%), rash (59.1%) and leukopenia (59.1%). For patients receiving palbociclib, neutropenia (69.2%), leukopenia (69.2%) and anemia (30.8%) occurred. In terms of discontinuation owing to adverse events (AEs), pneumonitis, thrombocytopenia, edema, fatigue, and neutropenia were experienced in the everolimus group. The cost-effectiveness of everolimus and palbociclib are equivalent, but since the prevalence of AEs is high in patients receiving everolimus, its AE management is important.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call