Skip to main content
Free access
Research Article
14 December 2018

Economic evaluation of trifluridine and tipiracil hydrochloride in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Greece

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the cost–effectiveness of trifluridine and tipiracil hydrochloride (FTD/TPI) compared with best supportive care (BSC) or regorafenib for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have been previously treated with or are not considered candidates for available therapies including fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapies, anti-VEGF agents and anti-EGFR agents in Greece. Methods: A partitioned survival model was locally adapted from a third-party payer perspective over a 10 year time horizon. Efficacy data and utility values were extracted from published studies. Resource consumption data were obtained from local experts using a questionnaire developed for the purpose of the study and was combined with unit costs obtained from official sources. All costs reflect the year 2017 in euros. Primary outcomes were patients’ life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total costs and incremental cost–effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per QALY and LYs gained. Results: Total life time cost per patient for FTD/TPI, BSC and regorafenib was estimated to be €10,087, €1,879 and €10,850, respectively. In terms of health outcomes, FTD/TPI was associated with 0.25 and 0.11 increment in LYs compared with BSC and regorafenib, respectively. Furthermore, FTD/TPI was associated with 0.17, and 0.07 increment in QALYs compared with BSC and regorafenib, resulting in ICERs of €32,759 per LY gained and €49,326 per QALY gained versus BSC. Moreover, FTD/TPI was a dominant alternative over regorafenib. Conclusion: The results indicate that FTD/TPI may represent a cost-effective treatment option compared with other alternative therapies as a third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Greece.

Supplementary Material

File (suppl_file.docx)

References

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: •• of considerable interest
1.
Ferlay J, Steliarova-Foucher E, Lortet-Tieulent J et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. Eur. J. Cancer 49(6), 1374–1403 (2013).
2.
Schmoll HJ, Van Cutsem E, Stein A et al. ESMO consensus guidelines for management of patients with colon and rectal cancer. a personalized approach to clinical decision making. Ann. Oncol. 23(10), 2479–2516 (2012).
3.
Chu E. An update on the current and emerging targeted agents in metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin. Colorectal Cancer 11(1), 1–13 (2012).
4.
Grothey A, Van Cutsem E, Sobrero A et al. Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase III trial. Lancet 381(9863), 303–312 (2013).
5.
Van Cutsem E, Cervantes A, Adam R et al. ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann. Oncol. 27(8), 1386–1422 (2016).
•• Guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
6.
European Medicines Agency. Trifluridine/tipiracil (Lonsurf®) product information (2015). www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/003897/WC500206246.pdf.
7.
Mayer RJ, Van Cutsem E, Falcone A et al. Randomized trial of TAS-102 for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 372(20), 1909–1919 (2015).
8.
Yoshino T1, Mizunuma N, Yamazaki K et al. TAS-102 monotherapy for pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase II trial. Lancet Oncol. 13(10), 993–1001 (2012).
9.
Bullement A, Underhill S, Fougeray R, Hatswell AJ. Cost‐effectiveness of trifluridine/tipiracil for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer in England and Wales. Clin. Colorectal Cancer 17(1), e143–e151 (2018).
10.
Kourlaba G, Rapti V, Alexopoulos A et al. Everolimus plus exemestane versus bevacizumab-based chemotherapy for second-line treatment of hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in Greece: an economic evaluation study. BMC Health Serv. Res. 15, 307 (2015).
11.
Maniadakis N, Kaitelidou D, Siskou O et al. Economic evaluation of treatment strategies for patients suffering acute myocardial infarction in Greece. Hellenic J. Cardiol. 46(3), 212–221 (2005).
12.
Gourzoulidis G, Kourlaba G, Kakisis J et al. Cost–effectiveness analysis of rivaroxaban for treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in Greece. Clin. Drug Investig. 37(9), 833–844 (2017).
13.
Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 50(6), 683–691 (1997).
14.
National Organisation for Healthcare Services Provision. Official web site of EOPYY. (2016). www.eopyy.gov.gr/Home/StartPage?a_HomePage=Index.
15.
Greek Ministry of Health. Drug price bulletin 2017. www.moh.gov.gr/articles/times-farmakwn/deltia-timwn.
17.
Eichler HG, Kong SX, Gerth WC, Mavros P, Jönsson B. Use of cost–effectiveness analysis in health-care resource allocation decision-making: how are cost–effectiveness thresholds expected to emerge? Value Health 7(5), 518–528 (2004).
18.
International Monetary Fund. World economic outlook database. (2017). www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2017/02/weodata/index.aspx.
19.
Kimura M, Usami E, Iwai M, Go M, Teramachi H, Yoshimura T. Comparison of cost–effectiveness of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil combination tablet for treating advanced and recurrent colorectal cancer. Mol. Clin. Oncol. 5(5), 635–640 (2016).