Cost-effectiveness and safety of ramucirumab plus paclitaxel chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced and recurrent gastric cancer

Abstract

Introduction

Weekly paclitaxel (PTX), irinotecan (CPT-11) and ramucirumab plus paclitaxel (Ram + PTX) are currently recommended as the standard second-line or later chemotherapies for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of using Ram + PTX vs. PTX or CPT-11. Furthermore, we investigated the safety and treatment continuity of Ram + PTX in Japan.

Methods

Expected costs were calculated based on data from patients with advanced and recurrent gastric cancer who were treated with PTX, CPT-11 and Ram + PTX. A literature review was performed to obtain clinical information so that the probability of the efficacy of each chemotherapy could be calculated. The cost-effectiveness ratio of each chemotherapy agent was calculated by dividing the expected cost by the median survival time (MST).

Results

The cost-effectiveness ratio per month was JPY 85,395.8/MST for the PTX regimen, JPY 132,735.4/MST for the CPT-11 regimen and JPY 657,175.4/MST for the Ram + PTX regimen (p < 0.001). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per month of the Ram + PTX regimen to the PTX regimen was JPY 2,780,432.4/MST. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the Ram + PTX regimen to the CPT-11 regimen was JPY 2,185,179.0/MST. With regard to the reasons for discontinuation of treatment, the Ram + PTX regimen had only one case of being discontinued owing to adverse events, and had a profile similar to that of the PTX and CPT-11 regimens.

Conclusion

These findings show that the Ram + PTX regimen is less cost-effective compared to both the PTX and CPT-11 regimen, but the Ram + PTX regimen is a well-tolerated regimen with sufficient efficacy.

Keywords

Ramucirumab paclitaxel cost-effectiveness adverse event advanced and recurrent gastric cancer

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Boku

Yamamoto

Fukuda

et al.

Gastrointestinal Oncology Study Group of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group: fluorouracil versus combination of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus S-1 in metastatic gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 2009; 10: 1063–1069.

Koizumi

Narahara

Hara

et al.

S-1 plus cisplatin versus S-1 alone for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (SPIRITS trial): a phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 2008; 9: 215–221.

Shitara

Oze

Mizota

et al.

Randomized phase II study comparing dose escalated weekly paclitaxel vs. standard dose weekly paclitaxel for patients with previously treated advanced gastric cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2011; 41: 287–290.

Shimoyama

Yasui

Boku

et al.

Weekly paclitaxel for heavily treated advanced or recurrent gastric cancer refractory to fluorouracil, irinotecan, and cisplatin. Gastric Cancer 2009; 12: 206–211.

Hironaka

Zenda

Boku

et al.

Weekly paclitaxel as second-line chemotherapy for advanced or recurrent gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 2006; 9: 14–18.

Koizumi

Akiya

Sato

et al.

Second-line chemotherapy with biweekly paclitaxel after failure of fluoropyrimidine-based treatment in patients with advanced or recurrent gastric cancer: a report from the gastrointestinal oncology group of the Tokyo Cooperative Oncology Group, TCOG GC-0501 trial. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2009; 39: 713–719.

Matsuda

Kunisaki

Makino

et al.

Phase II study of weekly paclitaxel as a second-line treatment for S-1-refractory advanced gastric cancer. Anticancer Res 2009; 29: 2863–2867.

Kodera

Ito

Mochizuki

et al.

Chubu Clinical Cancer Group: a phase II study of weekly paclitaxel as second-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer (CCOG0302 study). Anticancer Res 2007; 27: 2667–2671.

Hironaka

Ueda

Yasui

et al.

Randomized, open-label, phase III study comparing irinotecan with paclitaxel in patients with advanced gastric cancer without severe peritoneal metastasis after failure of prior combination chemotherapy using fluoropyrimidine plus platinum: WJOG 4007 trial. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 4438–4444.

10.

Chun

Kim

Lee

et al.

Weekly irinotecan in patients with metastatic gastric cancer failing cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2004; 34: 8–13.

11.

Kuculzeybek

Dirican

Erten

et al.

Second-line irinotecan after cisplatin, fluoropyrimidin and docetaxel for chemotherapy of metastatic gastric cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2012; 13: 2771–2774.

12.

Farhat

. A general review of the role of irinotecan (CPT11) in the treatment of gastric cancer. Med Oncol 2007; 24: 137–146.

13.

Thuss-Patience

Kretzschmar

Bichev

et al.

Survival advantage for irinotecan versus best supportive care as second-line chemotherapy in gastric cancer – a randomised phase III study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO). Eur J Cancer 2011; 47: 2306–2314.

14.

Kang

Lee

Lim

et al.

Salvage chemotherapy for pretreated gastric cancer: a randomized phase III trial comparing chemotherapy plus best supportive care with best supportive care alone. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 1513–1518.

15.

Higuchi

Tanabe

Shimada

et al.

Biweekly irinotecan plus cisplatin versus irinotecan alone as second-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: a randomised phase III trial (TCOG GI-0801/BIRIP trial). Eur J Cancer 2014; 50: 1437–1445.

16.

Tanabe

Fujii

Nishikawa

et al.

Phase II/III study of second-line chemotherapy comparing irinotecan-alone with S-1 plus irinotecan in advanced gastric cancer refractory to first-line treatment with S-1 (JACCRO GC-05). Ann Oncol 2015; 26: 1916–1922.

17.

Fujitani

Narahara

Takiuchi

et al.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of S-1 combined with weekly paclitaxel in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Oncology 2005; 69: 414–420.

18.

Kumagai

Saikawa

Nakamura

et al.

Clinical experience of second-line chemotherapy with S-1/CPT-11 for highly advanced gastric cancer. Jpn J Canc Chemother 2008; 35: 245–250. In Japanese).

19.

Komatsu

Yuki

Fuse

et al.

Phase 1/2 clinical study of irinotecan and oral S-1 (IRIS) in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Adv Ther 2010; 27: 483–492.

20.

Bang

Van Cutsem

Feyereislova

et al.

Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for treatment of HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ToGA): a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010; 376: 687–697.

21.

Fuchs

Tomasek

Yong

et al.

Ramucirumab monotherapy for previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (REGARD): an international, randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2014; 383: 31–39.

22.

Wilke

Muro

Van Cutsem

et al.

Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15: 1224–1235.

23.

Kuo

Chen

. New Hope for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer treatment: trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) from the perspective of nursing care. Hu Li Za Zhi 2016; 63: 121–126.

24.

Jin

Yoon

. The promise of PD-1 inhibitors in gastro-esophageal cancers: microsatellite instability vs. PD-L1. J Gastrointest Oncol 2016; 7: 771–788.

25.

Meropol

Schrag

Smith

et al.

American Society of Clinical Oncology guidance statement: the cost of cancer care. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 3868–3874.

26.

Williams

McIver

Moore

et al.

The use of economic evaluations in NHS decision-making: a review and empirical investigation. Health Technol Assess 2008; 12: 1–175.

27.

Chen

Jiang

et al.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer in China. World J Gastroenterol 2008; 14: 2715–2722.

28.

Shiroiwa

Fukuda

Shimozuma

. Cost-effectiveness analysis of trastuzumab to treat HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer based on the randomised ToGA trial. Br J Cancer 2011; 105: 1273–1278.

29.

Chen

Jiang

et al.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer in China. World J Gastroenterol 2008; 14: 2715–2722.

30.

Pharmaceutical Society. Insurance drug encyclopedia, Jiho, Tokyo: Pharmaceutical Society, 2012.

31.

Kawakami

. Medical fee points table, 35th ed. Tokyo: Social Insurance Institute, 2008.

32.

US Department Of Health And Human Services: common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) version 4.0. United States: National Cancer Institute, www.acrin.org/Portals/0/Administration/Regulatory/CTCAE_4.02_2009-09-15_QuickReference_5X7.pdf. (2009, accessed 18 April 2017).

33.

Kanda

. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant 2013; 48: 452–458.

34.

Shiroiwa

Sung

Fukuda

et al.

International survey on willingness-to-pay (WTP) for one additional QALY gained: what is the threshold of cost effectiveness?

Health Econ 2010; 4: 422–437.

35.

Ohkusa

Sugawara

. Research for Willingness to Pay for One QALY Gain. Iryo To Shakai 2006; 16: 157–165. In Japanese).