HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dooms, C. A. Articles by Vansteenkiste, J. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dooms, C. A. Articles by Vansteenkiste, J. F.

Cost–utility analysis of chemotherapy in symptomatic advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer

¹ Respiratory Oncology Unit (Pulmonology) and Leuven Lung Cancer Group, and ² Dept of Radiation Oncology and Leuven Lung Cancer Group, Catholic University, Leuven, Belgium.

CORRESPONDENCE: C. A. Dooms, Respiratory Oncology Unit (Dept of Pulmonology), University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium. Fax: 32 16346803. E-mail: christophe.dooms{at}uz.kuleuven.ac.be

Keywords: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy, clinical benefit, cost–utility ratio, economic analysis, gemcitabine, nonsmall cell lung cancer

Received: September 1, 2005
Accepted January 17, 2006

When using chemotherapy in patients with a short life expectancy, outcomes such as symptom improvement or clinical benefit receive increasing attention. Outcomes of subjective benefit to the patient can be rated as a utility in order to perform health economic analyses and comparisons with other treatment conditions. A cost–utility analysis has been performed alongside a prospective randomised clinical trial comparing single agent gemcitabine to cisplatin-based chemotherapy in symptomatic advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer patients.

Global quality of life as well as resource utilisation data were collected during first-line chemotherapy for both treatment arms. Incremental costs, utilities and cost–utility ratio were calculated.

Per patient, an incremental cost of \#8364;1,522 was obtained for gemcitabine compared to cisplatin–vindesine, mainly as a consequence of the direct cost of the cytotoxic drugs. When combined with utilities, this resulted in an incremental cost–utility ratio for gemcitabine of \#8364;13,836 per quality-adjusted life year gained.

In conclusion, although the least expensive strategy is cisplatin–vindesine, the greater clinical benefit of gemcitabine, resulting in an acceptable incremental cost–utility ratio as compared with other healthcare interventions, balances its higher cost. The gains in subjective outcome achieved with palliative chemotherapy are critical from both a clinical and a health economic point of view.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Y.-C. T. Shih and M. T. Halpern Economic Evaluations of Medical Care Interventions for Cancer Patients: How, Why, and What Does it Mean? CA Cancer J Clin, July 1, 2008; 58(4): 231 - 244. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]