Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
6
pubmed:dateCreated
2001-7-19
pubmed:abstractText
A cost-utility analysis has been performed comparing taxanes, vinorelbine and standard therapy for metastatic breast cancer considering clinical efficacy, quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) and costs. A decision model has been built. Clinical efficacy data were collected by literature review. Utility data and cost data were collected from previous studies and Dutch wholesale prices. Except for the MV standard therapy, VM has the lowest C/E ratio of $17,114/QALY, followed by paclitaxel ($30,270/QALY) and docetaxel ($49,739/QALY). VM yields the highest number of QALYs (0.47), compared to paclitaxel (0.35), docetaxel (0.34) and MV (0.29). Compared to the MV standard therapy, the incremental C/E of VM is $23,046/QALY, which is the lowest of all alternatives. We conclude that compared to paclitaxel, docetaxel and MV standard chemotherapy, VM is the most cost-effective second-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer patients. There is a considerable variation in utility scores, depending on the methods or the data sources used. The C/E ratios were influenced most strongly by drug prices, utility and efficacy (in descending order of importance).
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Jul
pubmed:issn
0959-4973
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
12
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
533-40
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-4-24
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2001
pubmed:articleTitle
A cost--utility analysis comparing second-line chemotherapy schemes in patients with metastatic breast cancer.
pubmed:affiliation
Institute for Medical Technology Assessment/Department of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article