Economic Evaluation of Sacituzumab Govitecan for the Treatment of Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in China and the US

The effectiveness of Sacituzumab Govitecan (SG) for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) has been demonstrated. We aimed to evaluate its cost-effectiveness on mTNBC from the Chinese and United States (US) perspective. A partitioned survival model was developed to compare the cost and eff...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFrontiers in oncology Vol. 11; p. 734594
Main Authors Chen, Jigang, Han, Mingyang, Liu, Aihua, Shi, Bo
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Switzerland Frontiers Media S.A 28.10.2021
Subjects
breast cancer
China
economic evaluation
Oncology
Sacituzumab Govitecan
Sacituzumab Govitecan
breast cancer
economic evaluation
China
US
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The effectiveness of Sacituzumab Govitecan (SG) for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) has been demonstrated. We aimed to evaluate its cost-effectiveness on mTNBC from the Chinese and United States (US) perspective. A partitioned survival model was developed to compare the cost and effectiveness of SG single-agent chemotherapy based on clinical data from the ASCENT phase 3 randomized trial. Cost and utility data were obtained from the literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was measured, and one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to observe model stability. A Markov model was constructed to validate the results. In China, SG yielded an additional 0.35 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) at an additional cost of Chinese Renminbi ¥2257842. The ICER was ¥6375856 ($924037)/QALY. In the US, SG yielded the same additional QALY at an extra cost of $175393 and the ICER was $494479/QALY. Similar results were obtained from the Markov model. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that SG price had the greatest impact on the ICER. PSA showed the probability of SG to be cost-effective when compared with chemotherapy was zero at the current willing-to-pay threshold of ¥217341/QALY and $150000/QALY in China and the US, respectively. The probability of cost-effectiveness of SG would approximate 50% if its price was reduced to ¥10.44/mg in China and $3.65/mg in the US. SG is unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment of mTNBC at the current price both in China and the US.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
These authors have contributed equally to this work
This article was submitted to Breast Cancer, a section of the journal Frontiers in Oncology
Reviewed by: Surasak Saokaew, University of Phayao, Thailand; Longfeng Zhang, Fujian Provincial Cancer Hospital, China
Edited by: Mingjun Rui, China Pharmaceutical University, China
ISSN:2234-943X
2234-943X
DOI:10.3389/fonc.2021.734594