Trastuzumab Deruxtecan for Treating HER2-Positive Unresectable or Metastatic Breast Cancer After Two or More Anti-HER2 Therapies: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

Rachel Houten (), Nigel Fleeman (), James Mahon (), Marty Chaplin (), Katherine Edwards (), Sophie Beale (), Angela Boland (), Yenal Dundar (), Ashley Marsden (), Zafar Malik () and Carlo Palmieri ()
Additional contact information
Rachel Houten: University of Liverpool
Nigel Fleeman: University of Liverpool
James Mahon: Coldingham Analytical Services
Marty Chaplin: University of Liverpool
Katherine Edwards: University of Liverpool
Sophie Beale: Hare Research
Angela Boland: University of Liverpool
Yenal Dundar: University of Liverpool
Ashley Marsden: North West Medicines Information Centre
Zafar Malik: The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre
Carlo Palmieri: The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre

PharmacoEconomics - Open, 2023, vol. 7, issue 3, No 2, 345-358

Abstract: Abstract The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) provides guidance to improve health and social care in England and Wales. NICE invited Daiichi Sankyo to submit evidence for the use of trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) for treating human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)-positive unresectable or metastatic breast cancer (UBC/MBC) after two or more anti-HER2 therapies, in accordance with NICE’s Single Technology Appraisal process. The Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, part of the University of Liverpool, was commissioned to act as the Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article summarises the ERG’s review of the evidence submitted by the company and provides an overview of the NICE Appraisal Committee’s (AC’s) final decision made in May 2021. Results from the company’s base-case fully incremental analysis showed that, compared with T-DXd, eribulin and vinorelbine were dominated and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained versus capecitabine was £47,230. The ERG scenario analyses generated a range of ICERs, with the highest being a scenario relating to a comparison of T-DXd versus capecitabine (£78,142 per QALY gained). The ERG considered that due to a lack of appropriate clinical effectiveness evidence, the relative effectiveness of T-DXd versus any comparator treatment could not be determined with any degree of certainty. The NICE AC agreed that the modelling of overall survival was highly uncertain and concluded that treatment with T-DXd could not be recommended for routine use within the National Health Service (NHS). T-DXd was, however, recommended for use within the Cancer Drugs Fund, provided Managed Access Agreement conditions were followed.

Date: 2023
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-023-00405-2 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:7:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s41669-023-00405-2

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

DOI: 10.1007/s41669-023-00405-2

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 ().