Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Ben-Hamadi, R.
• Duh, M. S.
• Aggarwal, J.
• Henckler, A.
• McKenzie, R. S.
• Piech, C. Tak

Titel

The cost-effectiveness of weekly epoetin alfa relative to weekly darbepoetin alfa in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia

Ist Teil von

• Current medical research and opinion, 2005-10, Vol.21 (10), p.1677-1682

Ort / Verlag

England: Informa UK Ltd

Erscheinungsjahr

2005

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

Taylor & Francis

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the cost-effectiveness of epoetin alfa (EPO) and darbepoetin alfa (DARB) for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA), using dosing regimens approved by the FDA (EPO 40 000 U once weekly and DARB 2.25 mcg/kg once weekly). Methods: The study compared published results of two double-blind, randomized, phase III trials one utilizing EPO (N = 166) and the other, DARB (N = 367). Patients in both trials had similar baseline characteristics. Effectiveness was measured as the proportion of EPO or DARB patients who were successfully treated (i.e., did not require blood transfusion) during weeks 0–16 and 5–16, respectively. Estimated drug costs were presented in 2005 USD based on wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) and average drug utilization over 16 weeks. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the estimated drug costs divided by transfusion effectiveness. Threshold analysis was used to determine the break-even point at which EPO and DARB had the same drug costs. Results: Estimated drug costs over 16 weeks were $9039 for EPO and $13 555 for DARB. During weeks 5–16, 85% of EPO patients and 73% of DARB patients were successfully treated, resulting in average cost-effectiveness ratios of $106 for EPO and $186 for DARB per one per cent of successfully treated patients. A 33% reduction in DARB WAC was required to achieve the same drug costs as for EPO. Conclusions: Utilizing FDA-approved doses, EPO was found to result in lower drug costs and better treatment success when compared to DARB. Hence, EPO is a dominant alternative compared to DARB for the treatment of CIA. The analyses presented here are not without limitations. Specifically, although the studies were comparable, patients were ultimately drawn from different populations.