The Influence Of Price Regulation Method On Price Trajectory – Assessment Of Cancer Drug Prices In Usa, The Uk And Israel

Abstract

A 3 4 7 -A 7 6 6 outcomes of ENZ and AA for the treatment of chemotherapy-naïve patients with mCRPC in Brazil across a 1-year horizon. Methods: This analysis was performed from the perspective of the Brazilian supplementary healthcare system. ENZ and AA clinical outcome curves were extracted from PREVAIL and COU-AA-302 trials and compared indirectly. The outcome estimates for radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), time to initiation of chemotherapy and overall survival (OS) were obtained at 12 months. The absolute differences between ENZ and AA were executed, and the NNT was calculated. Total costs-per-treated-patient were estimated by considering the costs for drug acquisition, patient monitoring, adverse-event management, post-progression and end of life care. Costs per additional patient with clinically meaningful outcome were calculated by multiplying the NNT by the incremental cost. Incremental cost was obtained from the difference between total costs per patient treated with ENZ and AA. Results: NNTs for rPFS, chemotherapydelayed rates and OS outcomes were 14, 26 and 91, respectively. NNT results reflect an additional patient with rPFS, chemotherapy delay or survival of > 1 year for ENZ treatment versus AA treatment. Total ENZ treatment cost (BRL 108,280) was BRL 3013 lower than AA (BRL 111,293) [1 USD= BRL 3.5485], resulting in ENZ being, overall, superior to AA. ConClusions: ENZ demonstrated positive NNT and lower treatment costs per patient versus AA. The findings support superior clinical outcomes at a lower cost for Brazilian patients with mCRPC treated with ENZ versus AA.objeCtives: Enzalutamide (ENZ) and abiraterone acetate (AA) are therapeutic options for treating patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Although published head-to-head trials directly evaluating both treatments are not currently available, it is possible to estimate the number needed to treat (NNT) and, thereby, indirectly compare differences between them. This analysis calculated the NNT and costs per additional patient by using clinically meaningful