Kelly Lien

A systematic literature analysis of correlative studies in low-dose metronomic chemotherapy trials

Low-dose metronomic (LDM) chemotherapy is a beneficial and very well-tolerated form of chemotherapy utilization characterized by the frequent and uninterrupted administration of low doses of conventional chemotherapeutic agents over prolonged periods of time. While patients resistant to standard maximum tolerated dose (MTD) chemotherapy may still benefit from LDM chemotherapy, there is a lack of predictive markers of response to LDM chemotherapy. We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PubMed databases for correlative studies conducted as part of LDM chemotherapy trials in order to identify the most promising biomarker candidates. Given the antiangiogenic properties of LDM chemotherapy, angiogenesis-related biomarkers were most commonly studied. However, significant correlations between angiogenesis-related biomarkers and study end points were rare and variable, even so far as biomarkers correlating positively with an end point in some studies and negatively with the same end point in other studies. Pursuing biomarkers outside the angiogenesis field may be more promising.

Impact of country-specific EQ-5D-3L tariffs on the economic value of systemic therapies used in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND Previous Canadian cost-effectiveness analyses in cancer based on the EQ-5D-3L (EuroQoL, Rotterdam, Netherlands) have commonly used U.K. or U.S. tariffs because the Canadian equivalent only just recently became available. The implications of using non-Canadian tariffs to inform decision-making are unclear. We aimed to reevaluate an earlier cost-effectiveness analysis of therapies for metastatic pancreatic cancer (originally performed using U.S. tariffs) with tariffs from Canada and various other countries to determine the impact of using non-country-specific tariffs. METHODS We used tariffs from Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Denmark, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, and Spain to derive EQ-5D-3L utilities for the 10 health states in the pancreatic cancer model. Quality-adjusted life years (qalys) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (icers) were generated, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (psas) were performed. RESULTS Canadian utilities are generally lower than the corresponding U.S. utilities and higher than those for the United Kingdom. Compared with the Canadian-valued scenarios, U.S. and U.K. estimates were statistically different for 3 and 9 scenarios respectively. Overall, 35% of the non-Canadian utilities (28 of 80) were significantly different, clinically, from the Canadian values. Canadian qalys were 6% lower than those for the United States and 6% higher than those for the United Kingdom. When comparing the qalys of each treatment with those of gemcitabine alone, the average percent change was +6.8% for a U.S. scenario and -7.5% for a U.K. scenario compared with a Canadian scenario. Consequently, Canadian icers were approximately 5.4% greater than those for the United States and 8.6% lower than those for the United Kingdom. Based on the psas and compared with the Canadian threshold value, the minimum willingness-to-pay threshold at which the combination chemotherapy regimen of gemcitabine-capecitabine is the most cost-effective is

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Systemic Therapies in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer in the Canadian Health Care System

5,239 less than in the United States and

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Different Sequences of the Use of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors for Wild-Type KRAS Unresectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

11,986 more than in the United Kingdom. CONCLUSIONS The use of non-country-specific tariffs leads to significant differences in the derived utilities, icers, and psa results. Past Canadian EQ-5D-3L-based cost-effectiveness analyses and related funding decisions might need to be re-visited using Canadian tariffs.

A network meta-analysis of the sequencing and types of systemic therapies with definitive radiotherapy in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN)☆.

OBJECTIVES To assess the cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine (G), G + 5-fluorouracil, G + capecitabine, G + cisplatin, G + oxaliplatin, G + erlotinib, G + nab-paclitaxel (GnP), and FOLFIRINOX in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer from a Canadian public health payers perspective, using data from a recently published Bayesian network meta-analysis. METHODS Analysis was conducted through a three-state Markov model and used data on the progression of disease with treatment from the gemcitabine arms of randomized controlled trials combined with estimates from the network meta-analysis for the newer regimens. Estimates of health care costs were obtained from local providers, and utilities were derived from the literature. The model estimates the effect of treatment regimens on costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) discounted at 5% per annum. RESULTS At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of greater than

Association of hospital and physician case volumes with cardiac monitoring and cardiotoxicity during adjuvant trastuzumab treatment for breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study

30,666 per QALY, FOLFIRINOX would be the most optimal regimen. For a WTP threshold of

The use of EGFR inhibitors in colorectal cancer: is it clinically efficacious and cost-effective?

50,000 per QALY, the probability that FOLFIRINOX would be optimal was 57.8%. There was no price reduction for nab-paclitaxel when GnP was optimal. CONCLUSIONS From a Canadian public health payers perspective at the present time and drug prices, FOLFIRINOX is the optimal regimen on the basis of the cost-effectiveness criterion. GnP is not cost-effective regardless of the WTP threshold.

Clinical Trials of Low-Dose Metronomic Chemotherapy in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE Patients with unresectable wild-type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer benefit from fluoropyrimidines (FP), oxaliplatin (O), irinotecan (I), bevacizumab (Bev), and epithelial growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRI). The most cost-effective regimen remains unclear. METHODS A Markov model was constructed to examine the costs and outcomes of three treatment strategies: strategy A (reference strategy): EGFRI monotherapy in third line ([3L]; ie, first-line [1L]: Bev + FOLFIRI [FP + I] or FOLFOX [FP + O]; second line [2L]: FOLFIRI/FOLFOX; 3L: EGFRI); strategy B: EGFRI and I in 3L (ie, 1L: Bev + FOLFIRI/FOLFOX; 2L: FOLFIRI/FOLFOX; 3L: EGFRI + I); and strategy C: EGFRI in 1L (ie, 1L: EGFRI + FOLFIRI/FOLFOX; 2L: Bev + FOLFIRI/FOLFOX; 3L: best supportive care). Efficacy data of the treatments were obtained from the literature. Health system resource use information was derived from chart review and the literature. Using Euro-QOL 5 Dimensions, utilities were obtained by surveying medical oncologists and costs from the Ontario Ministry of Health and the literature. The perspective of the Canadian public health care system was used over a 5-year time horizon with a 5% discount in 2012 Canadian dollars. RESULTS All three strategies had similar efficacy, but strategy C was most expensive. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for strategies B and C compared with A were 119,623 and 3,176,591, respectively. The model was primarily driven by the acquisition cost of the drugs. Strategy B was most cost effective when the willingness-to-pay threshold was >

Impact of physician and center case volume on the adequacy of cardiac monitoring during adjuvant trastuzumab in breast cancer.

130,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Sensitivity analysis showed that strategy C would be cost-effective only when the progression-free survival of EGFRI is better than Bev in 1L with hazard ratio < 0.23 at willingness-to-pay of

Neoadjuvant treatments for locally advanced, resectable esophageal cancer: A network meta-analysis: Neoadjuvant treatments for esophageal cancer

150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. CONCLUSION First-line use of EGFRI in metastatic colorectal cancer is not cost effective at its current pricing relative to Bev.