2009-06-01
Cost-effectiveness of temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme
Publication
Publication
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research , Volume 9 - Issue 3 p. 235- 241
Aim: To perform a systematic review on the costs and cost-effectiveness of concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide with radiotherapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma compared with initial radiotherapy alone. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for relevant publications on costs and cost-effectiveness until October 2008. Results: We found four relevant clinical trials, one cost study and two economic models. The mean survival benefit in the radiotherapy plus temozolomide group varied between 0.21 and 0.25 life-years. Treatment costs were between €27,365 and €39,092. The costs of temozolomide amounted to approximately 40% of the total treatment costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found in the literature were €37,361 per life-year gained and €42,912 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. However, the models are not comparable because different outcomes are used (i.e., life-years and quality-adjusted life-years). Conclusion: Although the models are not comparable according to outcome, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found are within acceptable ranges. We concluded that despite the high temozolomide acquisition costs, the costs per life-year gained and the costs per quality-adjusted life-year gained are comparable with other accepted first-line treatments with chemotherapy in patients with cancer.
Additional Metadata | |
---|---|
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | |
doi.org/10.1586/erp.09.15, hdl.handle.net/1765/16972 | |
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research | |
Organisation | Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam |
Uyl-de Groot, C., Stupp, R., & van den Bent, M. (2009). Cost-effectiveness of temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 9(3), 235–241. doi:10.1586/erp.09.15 |