Cost-minimization Analysis of Gastric Cancer Treatments in Hong Kong
This is a retrospective cost-minimization analysis study to compare the costs of treatment with EOF vs EOX regimens in patients with gastric cancer (GC) in Hong Kong. Patient baseline characteristics and cost data will be extracted from records and compared.
|Study Design:||Observational Model: Cohort
Time Perspective: Retrospective
|Official Title:||Cost-minimization Analysis of Xeloda® vs 5-fluorouracil-based Treatment for Gastric Cancer Patients in Hong Kong|
- Expected and unexpected provider costs [ Time Frame: At the completion of respective chemotherapy regimen ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]Expected and unexpected provider costs (chemotherapy, hospital stay, lab tests, clinic visits, AE management, other drug costs)
- Expected and unexpected societal costs [ Time Frame: At the completion of respective chemotherapy regimen ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]Expected and unexpected societal costs (patient time, travel)
|Study Start Date:||October 2011|
|Study Completion Date:||July 2012|
|Primary Completion Date:||July 2012 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)|
Epirubicin + Oxaliplatin + Capecitabine (EOX) Epirubicin 50 mg/m2 iv bolus d1 q3w x 8 cycles Oxaliplatin (Eloxatin) 130 mg/m2 iv over 2 hours d1 q3w x 8 cycles Capecitabine (Xeloda) 625 mg/m2 po bid x 6 months
FOLFOX4 Leucovorin 200 mg/m2 iv over 2 hrs before 5-FU, d1 and 2 5-FU 400 mg/m2 iv bolus and then 600 mg/m2 iv over 22 hrs, d 1 and d2 Oxaliplatin (Eloxatin) 85 mg/m2 iv d1 Q2w x 12 cycles
The oral chemotherapy agent Xeloda® was recently extended by the Hong Kong Hospital Authority as subsidized therapy for the treatment of colorectal cancer1. Xeloda®-based chemotherapy regimen has shown to be more cost-effective than 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) considering they had equivalent clinical efficacy in colorectal cancer treatment2,3. The total cost for 5-FU-based regimen was higher for the healthcare provider and society as a whole. Gastric cancer ranks fourth in cancer-related cause of death in the Hong Kong population4. 5-FU has known antitumor activity and has been used successfully in advanced gastric cancer (aGC) with cisplatin (FP), as well as with oxaliplatin ± epirubicin (FOLFOX4, EOF). When substituted with Xeloda®, the XP and EOX regimens have demonstrated to be noninferior in terms of progression-free survival when compared with FP and EOF, respectively5,6. In an economics evaluation done by the manufacturer for NICE submission on the use of Xeloda® for treatment of aGC, the use of XP regimen allowed a cost reduction while eliminating possible complication related to intravenous therapy7. Moreover, FOLFOX4, one of the common 5-FU-based regimens used locally, has demonstrated to produce a median overall survival of 10 months in advanced/metastatic gastric cancer patients8. An effect similar to that of EOX. Currently, there is no local data suggesting similar economic impact with Xeloda®-based regimen for gastric cancer when compared with 5-FU-based regimens. It is worthwhile to see if Xeloda®-based therapy for gastric cancer is a cost-effective alternative.
To compare retrospective costs of treatment with Xeloda®-based and 5-FU-based regiments in patients with advanced gastric cancer in Hong Kong.
This is a retrospective cost-minimization study to be conducted in a public hospital in Hong Kong. Sixty (60) gastric cancer patients will be identified from existing case records (30 who completed a Xeloda®-based regimen and 30 who completed a 5-FU-based regimen) in the study sites. Baseline characteristics from both groups prior to chemotherapy, including demographics, ECOG performance score, liver/renal function, metastases, and survival will be obtained. Cost data will also be extracted from patient records.
Information to be collected include cost of hospital admission and length of stay, outpatient visits, diagnostic tests and treatments, chemotherapy regimens, all other drug therapy, adverse side effect management, travel, and patient time. Baseline characteristics and costs will be compared. Descriptive statistics will be utilized and sensitivity analysis will be performed to investigate the robustness of the cost model.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01679054
|Princess Margaret Hospital|
|Kowloon, Hong Kong|