Abstract
The present data article aims to describe the input parameters for a Markov model assessing the cost-effectiveness of four treatment sequences for patients with HER-2 positive metastatic breast cancer. The model input parameters include costs for physician visits, drugs, adverse event management, computed tomography (CT) scan, laboratory tests, echocardiogram, utilities, disutilities as well as the shape and scale parameters of a log-logistic distribution used for the transition probabilities.
Keywords: Markov model, Metastatic breast cancer, Cost-effectiveness analysis, Treatment sequence
Subject | Economics and Econometrics |
Specific subject area | Cost-effectiveness analysis |
Type of data | Tables |
How data were acquired | Data were obtained from clinical trials, published literature and Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration's website. |
Data format | Raw and analyzed data |
Parameters for data collection | Data were obtained for metastatic breast cancer patients in the Taiwanese setting. |
Description of data collection | Cost data were mostly obtained from the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration website and further calculated based on average weight and body surface area for Taiwanese females. Transition probabilities were estimated following a survival analysis of approximated individual patient data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves of clinical trials. Utilities were obtained from published literature. |
Data source location | Taiwan and literature |
Data accessibility | Data were included in this article |
Related research article | A cost-effectiveness analysis of Trastuzumab-Containing Treatment Sequences for HER-2 Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients in Taiwan. The Breast (Revision submitted). |
Value of the Data
|
1. Data
The dataset includes the model input parameters for a Markov model assessing the cost-effectiveness of four trastuzumab containing sequences for HER-2 positive metastatic breast cancer patients as well as a brief description of the model assumptions. These input parameters include cost, transition probabilities, and utilities. Cost data include physician visit fee (Table 1), treatment acquisition cost both considering or not considering drug wastage (Table 2), costs associated with adverse event management (Table 2, Table 3), costs for computed tomography (CT) scan and echocardiogram and laboratory costs (Table 4). For transition probabilities, the shape and scale parameters for progression-free survival and overall survival were estimated as well as the probability of developing adverse events while on different treatment regimens. The entire list of model input parameters including the lower and higher bounds for deterministic sensitivity analysis as well as the distribution and standard deviations for probabilistic sensitivity analyses are shown in Table 5, Table 6 for base case and no drug wastage scenarios respectively.
Table 1.
Input parameters - Costs | Assumption and cost calculation |
---|---|
Monthly cost for physician visit |
|
| |
Acquisition cost of treatments— Pertuzumab, Docetaxel, Trastuzumab [PTH] vs. Docetaxel/Trastuzumab [TH] [2] |
|
Acquisition cost of treatments— Trastuzumab emtansine (TDM-1) |
|
Acquisition cost of treatments— Lapatinib + Capecitabine (Xeloda) |
|
Acquisition cost of treatments— Trastuzumab + Lapatinib |
|
Acquisition cost of treatments—Trastuzumab + Capecitabine |
|
No drug wastage scenario | |
Acquisition cost of treatments— Pertuzumab, Docetaxel, Trastuzumab [PTH] vs. Docetaxel/Trastuzumab [TH] [2] |
|
Acquisition cost of treatments—Trastuzumab emtansine (TDM-1) |
|
Acquisition cost of treatments— Lapatinib + Capecitabine (Xeloda) |
|
Acquisition cost of treatments— Trastuzumab + Lapatinib |
|
Acquisition cost of treatments—Trastuzumab + Capecitabine |
|
Table 2.
Adverse events | Costs in 2018 USD |
Reference | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Average | Lower bound | Upper bound | ||
Diarrhea | 3586.31 | 1766.39 | 7172.62 | Niraula et al. [5] |
Neutropenia | 6904.98 | 3532.78 | 18038.6 | Niraula et al. [5] |
Febrile neutropenia | 22481.34 | 11240.67 | 46033.23 | Niraula et al. [5] |
Thrombocytopenia | 18199.18 | 9046.06 | 35863.1 | Niraula et al. [5] |
Hand-foot syndrome/Palmar–plantar erythrodysesthesia/skin changes | 2034.03 | 1017.01 | 4121.58 | Niraula et al. [5] |
Rash | 321.16 | 160.58 | 535.27 | Niraula et al. [5] |
Nausea/Vomiting | 6958.51 | 3479.26 | 13917.02 | Niraula et al. [5] |
Fatigue | 1017.01 | 535.27 | 909.96 | Niraula et al. [5] |
Dyspnea | 4720.63 | – | – | Sharpe [6] |
Cardiovascular disorder | 2410.24 | 1826.86 | 4871.63 | Garrison et al. [7] |
*Original costs were inflated to represent 2018 U.S. dollars costs using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation calculator from the Bureau Labor of Statistics (available at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm)
Table 3.
Adverse event | Pertuzumab + Trastuzumab + Docetaxel | Trastuzumab + Docetaxel | TDM1 | Lapatinib + Capecitabine | Trastuzumab + Lapatinib | Trastuzumab + Capecitabine |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Trial | Swain et al. [2] | Swain et al. [2] | Verma et al. [8] | Geyer et al. [9] | Blackwell et al. [10] | von Minckwitz et al. [11] |
Diarrhea | 322.76 (158.97; 645.53) | – | – | 459.05 (226.10; 918.10) | 251.05 (123.65; 502.09) | 191.15 (94.15; 382.30) |
Neutropenia | 3383.44 (1731.06; 8838.92) | 3176.29 (1625.08; 8297.75) | – | – | – | – |
Febrile neutropenia | 2922.58 (1461.29; 5984.33) | 1573.69 (786.85; 3222.32) | – | – | – | – |
Thrombocytopenia | – | – | 2347.69 (1166.94; 4626.34) | – | – | – |
Hand-foot syndrome/Palmar–plantar erythrodysesthesia/skin changes | – | – | – | 142.38 (71.19; 288.50) | – | 660.44 (330.22; 1338.27) |
Rash | – | – | – | – | 70.65 (35.32; 117.76) | – |
Nausea/Vomiting | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Fatigue | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Dyspnea | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Cardiovascular disorder | – | – | – | – | – | 125.09 (94.82; 252.83) |
Total | 6628.78 (3351.33; 115468.77) | 4749.98 (2411.92; 11520.08) | 2347.69 (1166.94; 4626.34) | 601.43 (297.29: 1206.61) | 321.70 (158.98; 619.85) | 976.68 (519.18; 1973.40) |
Original costs were inflated to represent 2018 U.S. dollars costs using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation calculator from the Bureau Labor of Statistics (available at http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm); Anorexia and headache were excluded based on clinical expert opinion; -: Adverse events occurred in less than 5% of patients.
Table 4.
Cost input parameter | Assumption and cost calculation |
---|---|
Computed tomography (CT) scan [1] |
|
Laboratory tests [1] |
|
Echocardiogram [1] |
|
Table 5.
Parameters | Unit | Baseline | Deterministic SA |
Probabilistic SA |
Assumptions | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Low | High | PSA (SD) | Distribution | ||||
Medical visit | |||||||
Physician fees | Every 3 weeks | 8.15 | 6.11 | 10.19 | 1.01875 | Gamma | 25% +/− rule |
Acquisition cost of treatments | |||||||
Loading dose pertuzumab (840 mg) | 1st week of treatment only | 4564.42 | 2282.21 | 6846.63 | 1141.105 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Maintenance dose pertuzumab (420 mg) | Every 3 weeks starting from week 4 | 2282.21 | 1141.11 | 3423.32 | 570.5525 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Loading dose trastuzumab (8mg/kg) - | 1st week of treatment only | 3704.14 | 1852.07 | 5556.21 | 926.035 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Maintenance dose trastuzumab (6 mg/kg) | Every 3 weeks starting from week 4 | 1852.07 | 926.04 | 2778.11 | 463.0175 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Docetaxel (1 mg) | Every 3 weeks for 6 cycles | 765.86 | 382.93 | 1148.79 | 191.465 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Pegfilgrastim (6 mg) | Every 3 weeks for 6 cycles | 662.68 | 331.34 | 994.02 | 165.67 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
TDM1 | Every 3 weeks | 4666.48 | 2333.24 | 6999.72 | 1166.62 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Capecitabine (500 mg) | Assuming 2 weeks of treatment per cycle + 1 week rest | 158.27 | 79.14 | 237.41 | 39.5675 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Lapatinib (1500 mg daily) | Weekly | 684.18 | 342.09 | 1026.27 | 171.045 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Cost of the management of Adverse Events (grade 3/4) | |||||||
Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 1 time | 6628.784 | 3351.325 | 15468.774 | 3029.362 | Gamma | Calculated |
Trastuzumab + docetaxel | 1 time | 4749.982 | 2411.924 | 11520.075 | 2277.038 | Gamma | Calculated |
T-DM1 | 1 time | 2347.695 | 1166.942 | 4626.3412 | 864.8498 | Gamma | Calculated |
Lapatinib + capecitabine | 1 time | 601.4326 | 297.29 | 1160.6912 | 215.8503 | Gamma | Calculated |
Trastuzumab + lapatinib | 1 time | 321.70 | 158.9764 | 619.84961 | 115.2183 | Gamma | Calculated |
Trastuzumab + capecitabine | 1 time | 976.6843 | 519.1815 | 1954.2796 | 358.7745 | Gamma | Calculated |
Cost of Computed tomography (CT) scan | Every 9 weeks | 142.8571 | 107.1429 | 178.57143 | 17.85714 | Gamma | 25% +/− rule |
Laboratory tests | |||||||
Cost of blood work | Every 3 weeks | 6.27 | 4.7025 | 7.8375 | 0.78375 | Gamma | 25% +/− rule |
Cost of echocardiogram | Every 13 weeks | 119.05 | 89.2875 | 148.8125 | 14.88125 | Gamma | 25% +/− rule |
Cost of palliative care/End of life | 1 time | 7185.721 | 3592.86 | 10778.581 | 1796.43 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Utilities | |||||||
Progression-free under treatment | 0.785746 | 0.484478 | 0.9346889 | 0.112553 | Beta | Calculated | |
Treatment response | 0.061 | 0.025215 | 0.0742449 | 0.012257 | Beta | Calculated | |
Disease progression under treatment | 0.538 | 0.195937 | 0.8475389 | 0.162901 | Beta | Calculated | |
Disutilities | |||||||
Disease progression | −0.248 | −0.28854 | −0.0871499 | −0.050348 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | −0.05553 | −0.09841 | −0.0156854 | −0.02068 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for trastuzumab + docetaxel | −0.03953 | −0.05795 | −0.0112224 | −0.011682 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for TDM1 | −0.00851 | −0.01246 | −0.0024128 | −0.002512 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for lapatinib + capecitabine | −0.01826 | −0.03193 | −0.00395 | −0.006996 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for trastuzumab + lapatinib | −0.01716 | −0.02629 | −0.00425 | −0.005509 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for trastuzumab + capecitabine | −0.04017 | −0.0747 | −0.0092301 | −0.016367 | Negative Beta/Uniform | Calculated | |
Shape and scale parameters | |||||||
OS shape (Gamma) | |||||||
OS shape for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + Docetaxel | 0.543696 | 0.460437 | 0.6420112 | 0.09264 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.576501 | 0.501151 | 0.6631802 | 0.082668 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for TDM1 | 0.474333 | 0.414168 | 0.5432391 | 0.065853 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.464784 | 0.356733 | 0.605561 | 0.126953 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + lapatinib | 0.588267 | 0.467906 | 0.7395881 | 0.138613 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.451302 | 0.33817 | 0.6022825 | 0.134751 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale (Lambda) | |||||||
OS scale for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.019241 | 0.016447 | 0.0225107 | 0.003094 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.024996 | 0.021942 | 0.028476 | 0.003334 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for TDM1 | 0.032557 | 0.029043 | 0.0364946 | 0.003802 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.015981 | 0.0126 | 0.0202686 | 0.003912 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + lapatinib | 0.018985 | 0.015258 | 0.0236232 | 0.004268 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.040966 | 0.032984 | 0.0508812 | 0.009131 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape (Gamma) | |||||||
PFS shape for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.621872 | 0.560543 | 0.6899112 | 0.066004 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape (Gamma) | |||||||
OS shape for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + Docetaxel | 0.543696 | 0.460437 | 0.6420112 | 0.09264 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.576501 | 0.501151 | 0.6631802 | 0.082668 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for TDM1 | 0.474333 | 0.414168 | 0.5432391 | 0.065853 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.464784 | 0.356733 | 0.605561 | 0.126953 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + lapatinib | 0.588267 | 0.467906 | 0.7395881 | 0.138613 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.451302 | 0.33817 | 0.6022825 | 0.134751 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale (Lambda) | |||||||
OS scale for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.019241 | 0.016447 | 0.0225107 | 0.003094 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.024996 | 0.021942 | 0.028476 | 0.003334 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for TDM1 | 0.032557 | 0.029043 | 0.0364946 | 0.003802 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.015981 | 0.0126 | 0.0202686 | 0.003912 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + lapatinib | 0.018985 | 0.015258 | 0.0236232 | 0.004268 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.040966 | 0.032984 | 0.0508812 | 0.009131 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.555381 | 0.504406 | 0.6115074 | 0.054643 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for TDM1 | 0.610611 | 0.55205 | 0.6753828 | 0.062925 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.516163 | 0.422877 | 0.6300273 | 0.105689 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for trastuzumab + Lapatinib | 0.553842 | 0.480821 | 0.637952 | 0.080169 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.508397 | 0.410262 | 0.6300055 | 0.112114 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale (Lambda) | |||||||
PFS scale for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.052051 | 0.046527 | 0.0582304 | 0.005971 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.074128 | 0.067234 | 0.081729 | 0.007396 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for TDM1 | 0.104256 | 0.093296 | 0.116504 | 0.011841 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.03389 | 0.027966 | 0.0410695 | 0.006685 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for trastuzumab + lapatinib | 0.082315 | 0.069929 | 0.0968932 | 0.013757 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.115186 | 0.093703 | 0.1415951 | 0.024435 | Gamma | Regression | |
Weekly probability of developing adverse events | |||||||
Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.002564 | 0.001282 | 0.0038466 | 0.000641 | Beta | Calculated | |
Trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.001969 | 0.000984 | 0.0029528 | 0.000492 | Beta | Calculated | |
TDM1 | 0.004039 | 0.00202 | 0.0060591 | 0.00101 | Beta | Calculated | |
Lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.0105 | 0.00525 | 0.0157506 | 0.002625 | Beta | Calculated | |
Trastuzumab + Lapatinib | 0.001941 | 0.000971 | 0.0029122 | 0.000485 | Beta | Calculated | |
Trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.005766 | 0.002883 | 0.0086493 | 0.001442 | Beta | Calculated | |
Discount rate – weekly | 0.000662 | 0 | 0.000939 | – | Uniform | Calculated |
Table 6.
Parameters | Unit | Baseline | Deterministic SA |
Probabilistic SA |
Assumptions | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Low | High | PSA (SD) | Distribution | ||||
Medical visit | |||||||
Physician fees | Every 3 weeks | 8.15 | 6.11 | 10.19 | 1.01875 | Gamma | 25% +/− rule |
Acquisition cost of treatments | |||||||
Loading dose pertuzumab (840 mg) | 1st week of treatment only | 4564.42 | 2282.21 | 6846.63 | 1141.105 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Maintenance dose pertuzumab (420 mg) | Every 3 weeks starting from week 4 | 2282.21 | 1141.11 | 3423.32 | 570.5525 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Loading dose trastuzumab (8mg/kg) - | 1st week of treatment only | 1955.79 | 977.89 | 2933.68 | 488.9465 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Maintenance dose trastuzumab (6 mg/kg) | Every 3 weeks starting from week 4 | 1466.84 | 733.42 | 2200.26 | 366.7099 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Docetaxel (1 mg) | Every 3 weeks for 6 cycles | 760.88 | 380.44 | 1141.33 | 190.2211 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Pegfilgrastim (6 mg) | Every 3 weeks for 6 cycles | 662.68 | 331.34 | 994.02 | 165.67 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
TDM1 | Every 3 weeks | 3754.05 | 1877.02 | 5631.07 | 938.5124 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Capecitabine (500 mg) | Assuming 2 weeks of treatment per cycle + 1 week rest | 158.27 | 79.14 | 237.41 | 39.5675 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Lapatinib (1500 mg daily) | Weekly | 684.18 | 342.09 | 1026.27 | 171.045 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Cost of the management of Adverse Events (grade 3/4) | |||||||
Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 1 time | 6628.784 | 3351.325 | 15468.774 | 3029.362 | Gamma | Calculated |
Trastuzumab + docetaxel | 1 time | 4749.982 | 2411.924 | 11520.075 | 2277.038 | Gamma | Calculated |
T-DM1 | 1 time | 2347.695 | 1166.942 | 4626.3412 | 864.8498 | Gamma | Calculated |
Lapatinib + capecitabine | 1 time | 601.4326 | 297.29 | 1160.6912 | 215.8503 | Gamma | Calculated |
Trastuzumab + lapatinib | 1 time | 321.70 | 158.9764 | 619.84961 | 115.2183 | Gamma | Calculated |
Trastuzumab + capecitabine | 1 time | 976.6843 | 519.1815 | 1954.2796 | 358.7745 | Gamma | Calculated |
Cost of Computed tomography (CT) scan | Every 9 weeks | 142.8571 | 107.1429 | 178.57143 | 17.85714 | Gamma | 25% +/− rule |
Laboratory tests | |||||||
Cost of blood work | Every 3 weeks | 6.27 | 4.7025 | 7.8375 | 0.78375 | Gamma | 25% +/− rule |
Cost of echocardiogram | Every 13 weeks | 119.05 | 89.2875 | 148.8125 | 14.88125 | Gamma | 25% +/− rule |
Cost of palliative care/End of life | 1 time | 7185.721 | 3592.86 | 10778.581 | 1796.43 | Gamma | 50% +/− rule |
Utilities | |||||||
Progression-free under treatment | 0.785746 | 0.484478 | 0.9346889 | 0.112553 | Beta | Calculated | |
Treatment response | 0.061 | 0.025215 | 0.0742449 | 0.012257 | Beta | Calculated | |
Disease progression under treatment | 0.538 | 0.195937 | 0.8475389 | 0.162901 | Beta | Calculated | |
Disutilities | |||||||
Disease progression | −0.248 | −0.28854 | −0.0871499 | −0.050348 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | −0.05553 | −0.09841 | −0.0156854 | −0.02068 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for trastuzumab + docetaxel | −0.03953 | −0.05795 | −0.0112224 | −0.011682 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for TDM1 | −0.00851 | −0.01246 | −0.0024128 | −0.002512 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for lapatinib + capecitabine | −0.01826 | −0.03193 | −0.00395 | −0.006996 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for trastuzumab + lapatinib | −0.01716 | −0.02629 | −0.00425 | −0.005509 | Uniform | Calculated | |
Adverse events for trastuzumab + capecitabine | −0.04017 | −0.0747 | −0.0092301 | −0.016367 | Negative Beta/Uniform | Calculated | |
Shape and scale parameters | |||||||
OS shape (Gamma) | |||||||
OS shape for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + Docetaxel | 0.543696 | 0.460437 | 0.6420112 | 0.09264 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.576501 | 0.501151 | 0.6631802 | 0.082668 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for TDM1 | 0.474333 | 0.414168 | 0.5432391 | 0.065853 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.464784 | 0.356733 | 0.605561 | 0.126953 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + lapatinib | 0.588267 | 0.467906 | 0.7395881 | 0.138613 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS shape for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.451302 | 0.33817 | 0.6022825 | 0.134751 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale (Lambda) | |||||||
OS scale for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.019241 | 0.016447 | 0.0225107 | 0.003094 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.024996 | 0.021942 | 0.028476 | 0.003334 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for TDM1 | 0.032557 | 0.029043 | 0.0364946 | 0.003802 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.015981 | 0.0126 | 0.0202686 | 0.003912 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + lapatinib | 0.018985 | 0.015258 | 0.0236232 | 0.004268 | Gamma | Regression | |
OS scale for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.040966 | 0.032984 | 0.0508812 | 0.009131 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape (Gamma)rowhead | |||||||
PFS shape for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.621872 | 0.560543 | 0.6899112 | 0.066004 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.555381 | 0.504406 | 0.6115074 | 0.054643 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for TDM1 | 0.610611 | 0.55205 | 0.6753828 | 0.062925 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.516163 | 0.422877 | 0.6300273 | 0.105689 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for trastuzumab + Lapatinib | 0.553842 | 0.480821 | 0.637952 | 0.080169 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS shape for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.508397 | 0.410262 | 0.6300055 | 0.112114 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale (Lambda) | |||||||
PFS scale for pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.052051 | 0.046527 | 0.0582304 | 0.005971 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.074128 | 0.067234 | 0.081729 | 0.007396 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for TDM1 | 0.104256 | 0.093296 | 0.116504 | 0.011841 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.03389 | 0.027966 | 0.0410695 | 0.006685 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for trastuzumab + lapatinib | 0.082315 | 0.069929 | 0.0968932 | 0.013757 | Gamma | Regression | |
PFS scale for trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.115186 | 0.093703 | 0.1415951 | 0.024435 | Gamma | Regression | |
Weekly probability of developing adverse events | |||||||
Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.002564 | 0.001282 | 0.0038466 | 0.000641 | Beta | Calculated | |
Trastuzumab + docetaxel | 0.001969 | 0.000984 | 0.0029528 | 0.000492 | Beta | Calculated | |
TDM1 | 0.004039 | 0.00202 | 0.0060591 | 0.00101 | Beta | Calculated | |
Lapatinib + capecitabine | 0.0105 | 0.00525 | 0.0157506 | 0.002625 | Beta | Calculated | |
Trastuzumab + Lapatinib | 0.001941 | 0.000971 | 0.0029122 | 0.000485 | Beta | Calculated | |
Trastuzumab + capecitabine | 0.005766 | 0.002883 | 0.0086493 | 0.001442 | Beta | Calculated | |
Discount rate – weekly | 0.000662 | 0 | 0.000939 | – | Uniform | Calculated |
2. Experimental design, materials, and methods
All costs presented were direct medical costs from the perspective of the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration (TNHIA). Cost for physician visits, treatments, CT scans, and laboratory tests were obtained from the website of TNHIA and personal communication. Most HER-2 targeted treatments are dosed based on weight or body surface area (BSA), so the treatment costs were then calculated based on the average height and weight for the Taiwanese female population. The average height and weight were obtained from the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Department of Statistics in Taiwan. Two cost strategies were developed—with drug wastage and without drug wastage. In the drug wastage scenario, the price per vial for each intravenous drug was not broken down. For example, the calculated dosage for docetaxel is 119.25 mg, the total costs for 1 vial of 80mg plus the cost for 2 vials of 20 mg which equals to 120 mg will represent the costs for 119.25.
mg docetaxel. However, in the no drug wastage scenario, the price per vial for each intravenous drug was broken down. For example, the calculated dosage for docetaxel is 119.25 mg and the costs for 1.49 vial of 80mg docetaxel will represent the costs for 119.25mg docetaxel. Cost of palliative care was obtained from Taiwanese National Health Insurance Research Database.
Transition probabilities for progression and mortality were obtained from published clinical trials. Individual patient data (IPD) were obtained from the PFS and OS Kaplan-Meier curves from these clinical trials using a method described previously. Five standard parametric distributions were fitted to the IPD: exponential, Weibull, Gompertz, lognormal, and log-logistic. The log-logistic model was then selected and used to reconstructed IPD and derived equations for transition probabilities using the shape and scale parameters of the fitted model because it had the greatest model fit which was evaluated based on AIC and BIC. Utilities were obtained from published literature and clinical trials.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to reviewers for their insightful comments on earlier versions of the manuscript.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
- 1.National Health Insurance Administration Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan. Fee schedule for medical services of National Health Insurance. https://www.nhi.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=58ED9C8D8417D00B&topn=D39E2B72B0BDFA15 Available at:
- 2.Swain S.M., Kim S.B., Cortes J. Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (CLEOPATRA study): overall survival results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:461–471. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70130-X. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.National Health Insurance Administration Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan. Health Insurance drug inquiries. https://www.nhi.gov.tw/QueryN/Query1.aspx?n=FC660C5B07007373&sms=36A0BB334ECB4011&topn=3185A4DF68749BA9&upn=80567D1327F69CB9 Available at:
- 4.Taipei medical University hospital, Taiwan. https://english.tmuh.org.tw/ Available at:
- 5.Niraula S., Amir E., Vera-Badillo F. Risk of incremental toxicities and associated costs of new anticancer drugs: a meta-analysis. J. Clin. Oncol. 2014;32:3634–3642. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.8437. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Sharpe D. 2011. Treatment-Related Toxicities Add Substantially to Cost Burden of Treating Cancer Patients.http://www.obroncology.com/blog/2011/09/treatment-related-toxicities-add-substantially-to-cost-burden-of-treating-cancer-patients/ Available at: [Google Scholar]
- 7.Garrison L.P., Jr., Lubeck D., Lalla D. Cost-effectiveness analysis of trastuzumab in the adjuvant setting for treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer. Cancer. 2007;110:489–498. doi: 10.1002/cncr.22806. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Verma S., Miles D., Gianni L. Trastuzumab emtansine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012;367:1783–1791. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1209124. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Geyer C.E., Forster J., Lindquist D. Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2006;355:2733–2743. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa064320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Blackwell K.L., Burstein H.J., Storniolo A.M. Randomized study of Lapatinib alone or in combination with trastuzumab in women with ErbB2-positive, trastuzumab-refractory metastatic breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2010;28:1124–1130. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.21.4437. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.von Minckwitz G., du Bois A., Schmidt M. Trastuzumab beyond progression in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer: a German breast group 26/breast international group 03-05 study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009;27:1999–2006. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.6618. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]