Background: The PARP inhibitor olaparib has been shown to have clinical efficacy in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and ovarian or breast cancer. However, the high treatment cost associated with this drug limits its viability as a clinical treatment option. This work aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of olaparib as a maintenance treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer from the perspective of the United States and China healthcare systems and provides valuable suggestions for clinical decision making.Method: A three-state Markov model (progression-free, progressed disease, death) was constructed using TreeAge Pro 2020 software to evaluate the economic value of olaparib vs. placebo maintenance treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer based on the clinical data derived from phase III randomized controlled trial (POLO, ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02184195). Total costs, quality-adjusted life years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were used as economic indicators for this analysis. A 5-years horizon and 5%/year discount rates were used. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to assess the model uncertainty.Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of the use of olaparib vs. placebo in China and the United States were $6,694/QALY and $13327/QALY, respectively. All ICERs were far below the thresholds of $30829 in China and $50000 in the United States. Sensitivity analysis confirmed a stable economic advantage in the use of olaparib vs. placebo as maintenance therapy in China and the United States.Conclusion: Olaparib was estimated to be more cost effective than placebo for the maintenance therapy of patients with a germline BRCA mutation and pancreatic cancer in China and the United States at thresholds of $30829 and $50000 per QALY, respectively.
Background
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a rare disease in children, with significant mortality. Because of the limited research on pediatric PAH, first, systematic review of related drugs is conducted, and then economic evaluation of PAH drug treatment programs is conducted, which to provide a reference for the choice of more cost‐effective treatment options.
Methods
The search includes electronic databases such as Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and Embase. Through inclusion and exclusion criteria, screen high‐quality randomized controlled trials. We used TreeAge Pro 2011 software to construct the markov model, that to simulate the total medical cost and quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs), and to calculate the incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio. Sensitivity analysis of transfer probability, utility, and cost was carried out.
Results
Incorporate two studies that meet the criteria, one compared the therapeutic effects of bosentan and placebo on pediatric PAH, the other compared therapeutic effects of sildenafil and placebo on pediatric PAH, both articles were of good quality. Compared with the sildenafil group (3.38QALYs and $161,120.14), the QALY of the bosentan treatment group (3.33QALYs and $257,411.29) was reduced by 0.05, and the cost increased by $96,291.15. The estimated improvement to quality of life and reduced costs result in an estimate of economic dominance for sildenafil over bosentan. This dominant result persisted probabilistic analyses.
Conclusions
Based on this model, a more cost‐effective treatment drug for PAH in children is sildenafil.
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.