Back to Journals » ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research » Volume 9

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of afatinib after platinum-based therapy for the treatment of squamous non-small-cell lung cancer in France

Authors Pignata M, Chouaid C, Le Lay K, Luciani L, McConnachie C, Gordon J, Roze S

Received 10 March 2017

Accepted for publication 26 July 2017

Published 25 October 2017 Volume 2017:9 Pages 655—668

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S136657

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Lucy Goodman

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Professor Giorgio Lorenzo Colombo


Maud Pignata,1 Christos Chouaid,2 Katell Le Lay,3 Laura Luciani,3 Ceilidh McConnachie,4 James Gordon,5 Stéphane Roze1

1HEVA-HEOR, Lyon, 2Centre Hospitalier, Intercommunal de Créteil, Créteil, 3Boehringer Ingelheim, Paris, France; 4Ossian Health Economics and Communications, Basel, Switzerland; 5Boehringer Ingelheim, GmbH, Germany

Background and aims: Lung cancer has the highest mortality rate of all cancers worldwide. Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for 85% of all lung cancers and has an extremely poor prognosis. Afatinib is an irreversible ErbB family blocker designed to suppress cellular signaling and inhibit cellular growth and is approved in Europe after platinum-based therapy for squamous NSCLC. The objective of the present analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of afatinib after platinum-based therapy for squamous NSCLC in France.
Methods: The study population was based on the LUX-Lung 8 trial that compared afatinib with erlotinib in patients with squamous NSCLC. The analysis was performed from the perspective of all health care funders and affected patients. A partitioned survival model was developed to evaluate cost-effectiveness based on progression-free survival and overall survival in the trial. Life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy and direct costs were evaluated over a 10-year time horizon. Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted at 4% annually. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
Results: Model projections indicated that afatinib was associated with greater life expectancy (0.16 years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (0.094 quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) than that projected for erlotinib. The total cost of treatment over a 10-year time horizon was higher for afatinib than erlotinib, EUR12,364 versus EUR9,510, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR30,277 per QALY gained for afatinib versus erlotinib. Sensitivity analyses showed that the base case findings were stable under variation of a range of model inputs.
Conclusion: Based on data from the LUX-Lung 8 trial, afatinib was projected to improve clinical outcomes versus erlotinib, with a 97% probability of being cost-effective assuming a willingness to pay of EUR70,000 per QALY gained, after platinum-based therapy in patients with squamous NSCLC in France.

Keywords: cost, cost-effectiveness, afatinib, lung cancer

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]