Budget impact of sequential treatment with first-line afatinib versus first-line osimertinib in non-small-cell lung cancer patients with common EGFR mutations

Lotte Westerink (), Jelmer L. J. Nicolai, Carl Samuelsen, Hans J. M. Smit, Pieter E. Postmus, Ingolf Griebsch and Maarten J. Postma
Additional contact information
Lotte Westerink: University of Groningen
Jelmer L. J. Nicolai: Boehringer Ingelheim BV
Carl Samuelsen: Outcomes Analytica AS
Hans J. M. Smit: Rijnstate Hospital Arnhem
Pieter E. Postmus: University Medical Centre
Ingolf Griebsch: Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH
Maarten J. Postma: University of Groningen

The European Journal of Health Economics, 2020, vol. 21, issue 6, No 10, 943 pages

Abstract: Abstract Background The therapeutic landscape for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients that have common epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations has changed radically in the last decade. The availability of these treatment options has an economic impact, therefore a budget impact analysis was performed. Methods A budget impact analysis was conducted from a Dutch healthcare perspective over a 5-year time horizon in EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients receiving first-line afatinib (Gilotrif®) versus first-line osimertinib (Tagrisso®), followed by subsequent treatments. A decision analysis model was constructed in Excel. Scenario analyses and one-way sensitivity analysis were used to test the models’ robustness. Results Sequential treatment with afatinib versus first-line treatment with osimertinib showed mean total time on treatment (ToT) of 29.1 months versus 24.7 months, quality-adjusted life months (QALMs) of 20.2 versus 17.4 with mean cost of €108,166 per patient versus €143,251 per patient, respectively. The 5-year total budget impact was €110.4 million for the afatinib sequence versus €158.6 million for the osimertinib sequence, leading to total incremental cost savings of €48.15 million. Conclusions First-line afatinib treatment in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC had a lower financial impact on the Dutch healthcare budget with a higher mean ToT and QALM compared to osimertinib sequential treatment.

Keywords: Budget impact; Afatinib; Osimertinib; Treatment sequencing; I15; I18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I15 I18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-020-01186-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:21:y:2020:i:6:d:10.1007_s10198-020-01186-9

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10198/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10198-020-01186-9

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J.-M.G.v.d. Schulenburg

More articles in The European Journal of Health Economics from Springer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().