TIMING OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS IN BREAST CANCER: AN ANALYSIS OF PEER-REVIEWED LITERATURE

• Published in: Value in health Vol. 20; no. 5; p. A106
• Main Authors: van den Broek, R, Lam, NH, Lukose, A, Yoruk, B
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Lawrenceville Elsevier Science Ltd 01.05.2017
• Subjects: Analysis; Breast cancer; Cost analysis; Decision makers; Drug therapy; Drugs; ErbB-2 protein; Health care; Literature reviews; Monoclonal antibodies; Peer review; Regulatory agencies; Reviews; Sponsorship; Targeted cancer therapy; Timing; Trastuzumab; Websites; United States > US; Europe
• ISSN: 1098-3015; 1524-4733
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.05.005

OBJECTIVES: To review the time frame between drug approval dates and their cost-effectiveness analysis publications in breast cancer treatment from a US and European perspective. METHODS: A literature analysis was performed using EMBASE to identify cost-effectiveness analyses published from January 2000-December 2016 in breast cancer using the following search criteria: “original articles”, “English”, “human”, “breast cancer”, “cost effectiveness analysis” and “drug therapy”. The following information was extracted from the identified publications: publication date, type and phase of tumor, type of therapy, country, primary drug, and pharmaceutical sponsor. Drug approval dates were retrieved from Citeline and the regulatory bodies’ websites. The time frame between the drug approval date and the publication date of the cost-effectiveness analysis (i.e. delay period) was calculated. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 16 publications from the US and 33 from Europe. The most common tumor types were HER2 positive (13/49) and HR positive (7/49); 24 publications did not specify the tumor type. Among the 21 drugs identified in these publications, trastuzumab was the most common (11/49), followed by anastrazole (5/49) and exemestane (5/49). Twenty-three sponsored (10 US-based, 13 Europe-based), 16 non-sponsored (6 US-based, 10-Europe-based), and 1 publication with unknown sponsorship status were eligible for calculating the delay period. A mean delay of 40.5 months between drug approval and their cost-effectiveness analysis publication dates (SD = 37.4) was found for industry sponsored publications and 33.0 months (SD=28.0) for non-industry sponsored publications. A trend of shorter delay for US publications (29.1 months, SD = 42.4) compared to European publications (43.2 months, SD = 35.3) was observed, regardless of sponsorship. CONCLUSIONS: Many healthcare decision makers depend on the peer-reviewed cost-effectiveness analysis literature to make informed value-based decisions. With scarce information available, there is a need for more and timely publications, which could improve drug therapy appraisal of breast cancer treatment.