Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of Three Strategies Of Erlotinib Treatment In Non0-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective Multicentric French Study (Ermetic)

PCN79 ECONOMIC MODELING FOR TREATMENT FAILURE PATIENTS USING MULTIPLE ROUNDS OF THERAPY AS COMPARATOR Aggarwal S, Stevens CA PAREXEL Consulting, Bethesda, MD, USA; PAREXEL Consulting, Waltham, MA, USA OBJECTIVES: Treatment failure patients in various disease areas are often treated by multiple rounds of therapy. However, new treatment options are emerging that have potential to replace that treatment with single-agent or single round of combination treatment. It is challenging to demonstrate cost-effectiveness of these new agents, especially when comparator is not one single regimen but sequential treatment. We present here our results from a study where we developed a model that can incorporate multiple rounds of treatment or relapses to estimate cost-effectiveness of new emerging therapies. METHODS: Intervention was chosen as an emerging T-cell lymphoma drug candidate. Comparator was chosen as sequential treatment with 1–5 chemo regimens (called DHAP, ESHAP, ICE, HyperCVAD, and EPOCH). All comparator chemo regimens are generics and their prices were obtained from Medispan’s PriceRx. Intervention’s price was assumed as median price of branded chemotherapy agents. Cost, effi cacy, adverse events, and utilities were sourced and estimated from published studies for T and B-cell lymphoma. Relapses and number of chemo regimens for comparators were varied from 1–5. Sensitivity analyses were performed for all base calculations. RESULTS: Model results show that a new agent that can replace multiple rounds of treatment is relatively more cost-effective than another agent that replaces relatively fewer rounds of treatments. Our base-case incremental cost-effectiveness with one chemo regimen as comparator was $262,908. However, if there are 2,3,4, or 5 sequential rounds, the ICER values change to $223,078, $183,249, $143,420, and $103,591, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For newer agents that are indicated for treatment failure patients, the use of sequential treatments as comparator can signifi cantly improve their cost-effectiveness. The model approach described here can be used for arthritis, hepatitis C, and diabetes and oncology TF patients.