Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Fulvestrant 500 mg in Endocrine Therapy-Naïve Postmenopausal Women with Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer in the UK

Claire Telford (), Evelina Bertranou, Samuel Large, Hilary Phelps, Mattias Ekman and Christopher Livings
Additional contact information
Claire Telford: AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals
Evelina Bertranou: PAREXEL Access
Samuel Large: PAREXEL Access
Hilary Phelps: PAREXEL Access
Mattias Ekman: AstraZeneca
Christopher Livings: AstraZeneca

PharmacoEconomics - Open, 2019, vol. 3, issue 4, No 13, 559-570

Abstract: Abstract Introduction The selective estrogen receptor degrader fulvestrant is approved for the first-line treatment of postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who have not received prior endocrine therapy. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of fulvestrant versus comparator treatments in endocrine therapy-naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Methods A three-health-state (progression free, progressed disease, and death) partitioned survival model from the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective was developed to extrapolate study data for the cumulative probability of progression-free survival and overall survival to a lifetime (30-year) horizon. Relative comparator data were derived from a systematic literature review-informed network meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses were applied to assess the impact of uncertainty in the parameter input values on the results. Results Over a lifetime horizon (30 years), the incremental cost (British pounds sterling) per patient associated with fulvestrant treatment was £18,867 versus anastrozole, £23,097 versus letrozole, and £17,131 versus tamoxifen, with incremental quality-adjusted life-years of 0.55, 0.77, and 0.76, respectively, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £34,109, £29,827, and £22,532, respectively. The largest difference in costs between fulvestrant and the comparators was related to treatment costs. Conclusions Results suggest that fulvestrant could potentially be a cost-effective option compared with other endocrine monotherapies (anastrozole, letrozole, and tamoxifen) for treating endocrine therapy-naïve, postmenopausal women with HR+, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-019-0134-3 Abstract (text/html)

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:pharmo:v:3:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s41669-019-0134-3

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/adis/journal/41669

DOI: 10.1007/s41669-019-0134-3

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics - Open is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics - Open from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().