Cost-effectiveness analysis of adjuvant docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (TAC) for node-positive breast cancer: modeling the downstream effects

Abstract

For women with node positive BC, TAC improves DFS and OS compared to FAC and is a cost-effective adjuvant chemotherapy strategy.

Cost Effectiveness of tac versus fac in Adjuvant Treatment of Node-Positive Breast Cancer

“…Our results were consistent with those from Au et al 21 , who reported a cost per qaly of $18,505.54. They used Alberta provincial costs and also based their analyses on the tac-fac study.…”

The Cost–Utility of Adjuvant Chemotherapy Using Docetaxel and Cyclophosphamide Compared with Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide in Breast Cancer

“…Economic evaluations for other docetaxel-based adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for breast cancer have also been conducted 23,[42][43][44][45][46] . Compared with fac (5-fluorouracil-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide), tac (docetaxel-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide) administered with and without prophylactic g-csf was found to be a cost-effective strategy in a number of jurisdictions 36,37,39,40 .…”

“…Compared with fac (5-fluorouracil-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide), tac (docetaxel-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide) administered with and without prophylactic g-csf was found to be a cost-effective strategy in a number of jurisdictions 36,37,39,40 . From a Canadian health care system perspective, Au et al 42 reported cost-utility ratios of $46,003 and $18,506 per qaly gained with and without prophylactic g-csf at a 10-year horizon, and Mittmann et al 43 reported cost-utility ratios of $13,044 and $6,848 per qaly gained at a lifetime horizon. From a U.K. National Health Service perspective, Wolowacz et al 44 Compared with fec100 (5-fluorouracil-epirubicin-cyclophosphamide), fec-d (5-fluorouracil-epirubicin-cyclophosphamide-docetaxel) was also found to be a cost-effective strategy 23,46 .…”

Cost-effective analyses in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

“…This concern has led to an entirely new field of research: analysis of cost effectiveness in medicine in general and oncology specifically [3]. BCRT has, like many journals with clinical content, included manuscripts in which the cost effectiveness of a new treatment has been compared to an existing one [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]. Recently, though, the Editors have noticed a disturbing trend in that the submitted manuscripts appear to have been mainly or totally prepared and written by pharmaceutical companies.…”