This study was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness of erlotinib compared with docetaxel in the second-line management of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) within the UK National Health Service (NHS). A health-state transition model, based on two randomized phase III studies of erlotinib or docetaxel versus best supportive care, was used to estimate total direct costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the subsequent net monetary benefit. Erlotinib was associated with a reduction in total costs ( pound13 730 versus pound13 956) and improved outcomes (total QALYs of 0.238 versus 0.206) compared with docetaxel. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of this analysis. In summary, erlotinib appeared to generate similar overall survival, an increase in QALYs and a small reduction in total NHS costs compared with docetaxel, due to lower adverse event and drug administration costs. Consequently, from a health economics perspective for the treatment of relapsed stage III - IV NSCLC patients in the UK, erlotinib has advantages over docetaxel.
The weight of the evidence indicates that occurrence, timing, and number of acute rejection episodes are associated with increased risk of graft loss. Less is known about the severity of rejection, which is important because many immunosuppressive regimens lessen severity. Quantifying these relationships is a priority if acute rejection continues to be a surrogate trial endpoint.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.