EGFR-TKIs治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的成本-效果分析

• 药品评价-安全性研究 • 上一篇下一篇

EGFR-TKIs治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的成本-效果分析

康倩,徐丹妮

中国药科大学南京 211198,中国药科大学南京 211198

收稿日期:2013-11-03 修回日期:2013-11-03 出版日期:2013-12-25 发布日期:2013-12-25

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of EGFR-TKIs in the Treatment Of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

China Pharmaceutical University,Nanjing,211198,China Pharmaceutical University,Nanjing,211198

Received:2013-11-03 Revised:2013-11-03 Online:2013-12-25 Published:2013-12-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的：评价埃克替尼、吉非替尼和厄洛替尼三种EGFR-TKIs类药物治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的成本-效果。方法：效果数据来源于文献资料的Meta分析结果，成本指直接药品成本，运用传统决策分析的原理和方法，评价三种二线治疗方案的经济性。结果：埃克替尼、吉非替尼和厄洛替尼组的成本分别为143550.85元、200750.00元和260662.14元，有效率分别为27.27%、25.57%和20.66%，疾病控制率分别为74.09%、73.52%和70.56%。结论：埃克替尼作为二线药物治疗晚期NSCLC效果略优于吉非替尼和厄洛替尼，且具有绝对的成本效果优势。

Abstract: Objective： To estimate the cost-effectiveness of EGFR-TKIs in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer（NSCLC）.Methods： The efficacy of icotinib， gefitinib and erlotinib were derived from the Meta analysis of published studies. Direct medical cost was based on marketing drug prices.By a traditional decision analysis， the cost-effectiveness of second-line therapies was estimated. Results： In base case analysis，overall response rate was 27.27%，25.57% and 20.66%， disease control rate was 74.09%，73.52% and 70.56%，while costs were 143550.85，200750.00 and 260662.14 yuan for icotinib， gefitinib and erlotinib group，respectively. Conclusion： Icotinib is slightly more effective than gefitinib and erlotinib as a kind of second line treatment for advanced NSCLC. The cost-effectiveness of icotinib was more dominant than those of gefitinib and erlotinib.

康倩,徐丹妮. EGFR-TKIs治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的成本-效果分析[J]. .

参考文献

[1]Mendrola JM,Berger MB,King MC,et al.The single transmembrane domains of ErbB receptors self-associate in cell membranes[J]. JBiolChem, 2002;277(7):4704 -12.
[2]Novello S, Kielhorn A, Stynes G, et al. Cost-minimisation analysis comparing gemcitabine/cisplatin, paclitaxel/carboplatin and vinorelbine/cisplatin in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer in Italy. Lung Cancer,2005 ,48(3):379-387.
[3]WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment [M]. Offset Publication No.48. Geneva (Switzerland):World Health Organization,1979.
[4] Seung Tae Kim, Ji Eun Uhm, Jeeyun Lee, et al. Randomized phase II study of gefitinib versus erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer who failed previous chemotherapy[J]. Lung Cancer,2012,75:82-88.
[5] Junshik Hong, Sun Young Kyung, Sang Pyo Lee, et al. Pemetrexed versus Gefitinib versus Erlotinib in Previously Treated Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer[J]. ORIGINAL ARTICLE, 2010,25(3)：294-300.
[6] 王治华,唐勇. 吉非替尼与厄洛替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床分析[J].实用肿瘤杂志,2010,25(2)：195-199.
[7] 汪海岩,张德芳. 吉非替尼与厄洛替尼二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的对比研究[J].实用医学杂志,2012,28(20)：3444-3446.
[8] 张晓庆,李玉平. 吉非替尼与厄洛替尼治疗非小细胞肺癌疗效及药物经济学评价[J].中国新药与临床杂志,2009,28(11)：837-840.
[9] 彭亮. 厄洛替尼与吉非替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效和生存因素分析[D].北京：军医进修学院解放军总医院,2010.
[10] 张静,刘素勤,张洁. 晚期非小细胞肺癌二线治疗不同方案的疗效及成本效益分析[J].临床肿瘤学杂志,2012,17(10)：908-911.
[11] 陈建华,罗永忠,王伟. 盐酸埃克替尼与吉非替尼治疗化疗失败的非小细胞肺癌28例[J]. Chinese Journal of New Drugs,2012,21( 17)：2056-2059.
[12]陈建华,罗永忠,王伟. 盐酸埃克替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌III期临床试验[J]. 肿瘤药学,2011,1(5):441-443.
[13] SUN Y,SHI Y,ZHANG L,et al． A randomized,double-blind phase III study of icotinib versus gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer( nsclc) previously treated with chemotherapy( icogen) [J]．J Clin Oncol,2011,29( Suppl) : abstr 7522．
[14]THATCHER N,CHANG A,PARIKH P,et al． Gefitinib plus best supportive care in previously treated patients with refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomised,placebo-controlled,multicenter study ( iressa survival evaluation in lung cancer) [J]． Lancet,2005,366( 9496) : 1527 - 1537．
[15]Wells GA, Sultan SA, Chen L, Khan M, Coyle D.Indirect treatment comparison [computer program]. Version 1.0. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2009.