nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.06.2013 | Review Article

Comparing cost-effectiveness analyses of denosumab versus zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases

verfasst von: Kaitlin Koo, Kinsey Lam, Nicole Mittmann, Andre Konski, Kristopher Dennis, Liang Zeng, Henry Lam, Edward Chow

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 6/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Bone metastases from various cancers have been traditionally treated with bisphosphonates, such as zoledronic acid (ZA), to prevent future skeletal-related events (SREs). Denosumab (Dmab) has been shown to have more advantages in preventing SREs in clinical trials than ZA, but the cost to administer Dmab is significantly higher.

Methods

A literature review was conducted to investigate the methodologies used to compare the cost-effectiveness of Dmab and ZA. MEDLINE® and EMBASE were searched systematically for all cost-effectiveness analyses published between January week 1, 2006 to August week 1, 2012. Search strategies were designed to retrieve articles analyzing the cost-effectiveness and cost utility of Dmab compared to ZA in patients with bone metastases. From 12 references obtained in the initial database search, eight satisfied the predetermined criteria for full article review. Articles were analyzed for incremental costs per skeletal-related event avoided or incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained.

Results

All the studies identified received funding from Novartis Pharmaceuticals (the manufacturer of ZA) or Amgen Incorporated (the manufacturer of Dmab). The studies looked at the economic analysis using different associated costs and over various time periods, ranging from a 1-year to a lifetime time horizon.

Conclusion

It is not clear whether the methods used across studies are consistent, which may account for the differences between estimated costs and effects. Future research is suggested to explore the cost-effectiveness between Dmab and ZA using a standardize time frame and endpoint.

Coleman RE, Guise TA, Lipton A et al (2008) Advancing treatment for metastatic bone cancer: consensus recommendations from the Second Cambridge Conference. Clin Cancer Res 14(20):6387–6395PubMedCrossRef

Coleman RE (2008) Risks and benefits of bisphosphonates. Br J Cancer 98(11):1736–1740PubMedCrossRef

Janjan N. Bone metastases: approaches to management. Sem Oncol 2001; 28 (4 Suppl. 11): 28–34

Coleman RE (2004) Bisphosphonates: clinical experience. Oncologist 9(Suppl 4):14–27PubMedCrossRef

Pockett R, Castellano D, McEwan P et al (2010) The hospital burden of disease associated with bone metastases and skeletal-related events in patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, or prostate cancer in Spain. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 19:755–760CrossRef

Sathiakumar N, Delzell E, Morrisey MA et al (2011) Mortality following bone metastasis and skeletal-related events among men with prostate cancer: a population-based analysis of US Medicare beneficiaries, 1999–2006. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 14(2):177–183PubMedCrossRef

Bouganim N, Clemons MJ (2011) Bone-targeted agents in the treatment of bone metastases: RANK outsider or new kid on the block? Future Oncol 7(3):381–383PubMedCrossRef

Costa L, Lipton A, Coleman RE (2006) Role of bisphosphonates for the management of skeletal complications and bone pain from skeletal metastases. Support Cancer Ther 3(3):143–153PubMedCrossRef

Readyprice S (2010) Red book 2010: pharmacy’s fundamental reference (Red book drug topics). Thomson Healthcare, Montvale

10.

Stopeck A, Lipton A, Body J et al (2010) Denosumab compared with zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced breast cancer, a randomized, double blind study. J Clin Oncol 28(35):3152–3159CrossRef

11.

Fizazi K, Carducci M, Smith M, Damiao R, Brown J, Karsh L et al (2011) Denosumab versus zoledronic acid for treatment of bone metastases in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind study. Lancet 377(9768):813–822PubMedCrossRef

12.

Dranitsaris G, Hatzimichael E (2012) Interpreting results from oncology clinical trials: a comparison of denosumab to zoledronic acid for the prevention of skeletal-related events in cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 20:1353–1360PubMedCrossRef

13.

Zgeva (denosumab) for subcutaneous injection. Amgen. Revised 2010. Available at: http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/archives/fdaDrugInfo.cfm?archiveid=79486

14.

Snedecor SJ, Carter JA, Kaura S, Botteman MF (2012) Cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in the management of skeletal metastases secondary to breast cancer. Clin Ther 34(6):1334–1349PubMedCrossRef

15.

Ford J, Cummins E, Sharma P et al. Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and economic evaluation, of denosumab for the treatment of bone metastases from solid tumors. Aberdeen: Aberdeen Health Technology Assessment Group, Institute of Applied Sciences, University of Aberdeen; 2011

16.

Lothgren M, Bracco A, Lucius B et al (2011) Cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs. zoledronic acid (ZA) for the prevention of skeletal related events (SRE) in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors in the Netherlands. Value Health 14:A455CrossRef

17.

Snedecor SJ, Carter JA, Kaura S et al. Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid (ZOL) versus denosumab (Dmab) in prevention of skeletal-related events (SREs) in castration-resistant prostate cancer metastatic to the bone (mCRPC). J Clin. Oncol. 2011;(Suppl.) S29.

18.

Xie J, Diener M, Sorg R et al (2012) Cost-effectiveness of denosumab compared with zoledronic cid in patients with breast cancer and bone metastases. Clin Breast Cancer 12(4):247–258PubMedCrossRef

19.

Yu A, Namjoshi J, Xie K et al. Economic evaluation of denosumab compared with zoledronic acid in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer with bone metastases [Abstract]. Paper presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Genitourinary Cancer Symposium. Chicago, IL, USA, 3–7 June 2011.

20.

Xie J, Namjoshi M, Wu EQ et al (2011) Economic evaluation of denosumab compared with zoledronic acid in hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients with bone metastases. J Manag Care Pharm 17(8):621–643PubMed

21.

Stopeck A, Rader M, Henry D et al (2012) Cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs. zoledronic acid for prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States. J Med Econ 15(4):712–723PubMedCrossRef

22.

Carter JA, Botteman MF (2012) Health-economic review of zoledronic acid for the management of skeletal related events in bone-metastatic prostate cancer. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcome Res 12(4):1–13

23.

Sartor O (2011) Denosumab in bone-metastatic prostate cancer: known effects on skeletal-related events but unknown effects on quality of life. Asian J. Androl 13(4):612–613PubMedCrossRef

24.

Rader M, Goessl C, Cong Z (2012) Economic evaluation of denosumab compared with zoledronic acid in hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients with bone metastases. J Manag Care Pharm 18(1):74–75PubMed

25.

Hatoum HT, Lin SJ, Smith MR, Barghout V, Lipton A (2008) Zoledronic acid and skeletal complications in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases: analysis of a national medical claims database. Cancer 113(6):1438–1445PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Comparing cost-effectiveness analyses of denosumab versus zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases
verfasst von: Kaitlin Koo
Kinsey Lam
Nicole Mittmann
Andre Konski
Kristopher Dennis
Liang Zeng
Henry Lam
Edward Chow
Publikationsdatum: 01.06.2013
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 6/2013
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-013-1790-y

Springer Medizin

Comparing cost-effectiveness analyses of denosumab versus zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases