ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2010
Cost-effectiveness analyses of docetaxel versus paclitaxel once weekly in patients with metastatic breast cancer in progression following anthracycline chemotherapy, in Spain.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of economic evaluations of pharmacological cancer treatments in Spain between 1990 and 2010.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2013Pooled it
- Use of Drugs in Clinical Practice and the Associated Cost of Cancer Treatment in Adult Patients with Solid Tumors: A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Cost analysis of the management of brain metastases in patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC: alectinib versus crizotinib.Lung cancer management · 2020Article
- The economic burden of metastatic breast cancer in Spain.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2020Article
- Reviewing the quality, health benefit and value for money of chemotherapy and targeted therapy for metastatic breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2017Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of pazopanib in second-line treatment of advanced soft tissue sarcoma in Spain.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesOur aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of docetaxel versus weekly paclitaxel regimen in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracycline from the Spanish National Health Service (NHS) perspective.
methodsA Markov model with a 21-day cycle duration was developed to estimate total treatment-related costs and clinical benefits over 5 years of docetaxel (100 mg/m²) and weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m²). Patient data were obtained from the Randomized Phase III Study of Docetaxel Compared with Paclitaxel in Metastatic Breast Cancer (TAX- 311) and Anglo-Celtic IV trials. Utilities were obtained from literature, and unitary costs (€2009) from a Spanish health-cost database and the Catalogue of Medicines. Cost and benefits [life-years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY)] were discounted at 3%. Sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsDocetaxel yields higher health benefits (1.83 LYG; 1.08 QALY) than paclitaxel (1.46 LYG; 0.84 QALY). Global costs (treatment, concomitant medication, adverse events management, progression, best supportive care, and end of life phase) per patient were €20,052 and €9,982 with docetaxel and paclitaxel, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of docetaxel versus paclitaxel was €190/LYG and €295/QALY. Based on a €30,000/QALY threshold, docetaxel has 99% probability of being cost-effective. ICER was mostly sensitive to hazard ratio (HR) (when varied from 1.46 to 1.09; €3,517/ QALY), discount over the ex-lab price of Taxol® (75%; €6,396/QALY) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylactic treatment (when administered in 60% of cycles instead of 100%; cost saving). Variations in other inputs, such as time horizon (3-10 years), discount rate (0-5%), or adverse event cost (± 25%) were shown not to have relevant influence on the results.
conclusionCompared to weekly paclitaxel, docetaxel therapy is cost effective for treating metastatic breast cancer patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.