Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 27;18:352. doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4223-y

Table 7.

Summary of cost and benefit in the additional scenario analysis

Cost(SG$) QALYs LYs PFLYs ICER (SG$/QALY)
Independent model with parametric fittinga
 Weilbull
  PemCis 76,679 1.54 2.38 0.66
  Afatinib 92,486 1.66 2.55 1.10 129,416
 Exponential
  PemCis 73,775 1.53 2.37 0.71
  Afatinib 92,507 1.66 2.55 1.18 143,658
 Log-normal
  PemCis 76,851 1.57 2.43 0.70
  Afatinib 94,966 1.72 2.61 1.32 126,202
 Log-logistic
  PemCis 76,046 1.57 2.43 0.73
  Afatinib 94,764 1.71 2.60 1.34 133,627
Pricing scenariob
 10% reduction
  PemCis 75,682 1.58 2.45 0.68
  Afatinib 89,880 1.69 2.59 1.18 128,348
 20% reduction
  PemCis 72,632 1.58 2.45 0.68
  Afatinib 85,802 1.69 2.59 1.18 119,048
 30% reduction
  PemCis 69,583 1.58 2.45 0.68
  Afatinib 81,724 1.69 2.59 1.18 109,747
 40% reduction
  PemCis 66,534 1.58 2.45 0.68
  Afatinib 77,646 1.69 2.59 1.18 100,447
 50% reduction
  PemCis 63,485 1.58 2.45 0.68
  Afatinib 73,568 1.69 2.59 1.18 91,147

ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, QALY quality-adjusted life year, LY life year, PFLY progression-free life year, PemCis pemetrexed-cisplatin

aProgression-free and overall survival curves of both intervention arms extrapolated from Kaplan-Meier data from trial, with parametric curve fitting from time = 0 to tail-end

bPricing scenario with various discounting on the cost of afatinib. Afatinib was modelled in the first-line for the afatinib arm, and post-progression (second-line) for the PemCis arm, therefore the total cost of both arms reduced as a result of the reduction in selling price of afatinib