Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30479195›Full record

ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2018

Cost-Effectiveness of Niraparib and Olaparib as Maintenance Therapy for Patients with Platinum-Sensitive Recurrent Ovarian Cancer.

Lixian Zhong, Anh Thu Tran, Taylor Tomasino, Elizabeth Nugent, Judith A Smith

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT00753545 phase2completednot on this map

Phase II Randomised, Double Blind, Multicentre Study to Assess the Efficacy of AZD2281 in the Treatment of Patients With Platinum Sensitive Relapsed Serous Ovarian Cancer Following Treatment With Two or More Platinum Containing Regimens

TypeinterventionalSponsorAstraZenecaRan2008 to 2023Enrolled265ConditionsOvarian CancerArmsAZD2281, matching placebo
NCT01847274 phase3completednot on this map

A Phase 3 Randomized Double-blind Trial of Maintenance With Niraparib Versus Placebo in Patients With Platinum Sensitive Ovarian Cancer.

TypeinterventionalSponsorTesaro, Inc.Ran2013 to 2021Enrolled596ConditionsOvarian Neoplasms, Platinum Sensitive Ovarian CancerArmsActive comparator: Niraparib, placebo
NCT01874353 phase3active not recruitingnot on this map

Phase III Randomised, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled Study of Olaparib Maintenance Monotherapy in Platinum Sensitive Relapsed BRCA Mutated Ovarian Cancer Patients With a Complete or Partial Response Following Platinum Based Chemotherapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorAstraZenecaRan2013 to 2026Enrolled327ConditionsPlatinum Sensitive, BRCA Mutated, Relapsed Ovarian Cancer, Following Complete or Partial Response to Platinum Based ChemotherapyArmsOlaparib 300mg tablets, Placebo to match olaparib 300mg
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Germline and SomaticAnnals of laboratory medicine · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lixian Zhong1 Irma Lerma Rangel College of Pharmacy, Texas A&M University, College Station.
Anh Thu Tran1 Irma Lerma Rangel College of Pharmacy, Texas A&M University, College Station.
Taylor Tomasino1 Irma Lerma Rangel College of Pharmacy, Texas A&M University, College Station.
Elizabeth Nugent2 Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Predictive Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.
Judith A Smith2 Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Predictive Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.
Texas A&M University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe recent approval of olaparib and niraparib as maintenance therapy can significantly affect the management of ovarian cancer. Clinical benefits, however, come with trade-offs in adverse events and costs.

objectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of new ovarian cancer poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapies, olaparib and niraparib, as maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

methodsA decision tree model was constructed to evaluate the costs and effectiveness of olaparib and niraparib compared with placebo from a U.S. health care sector perspective. Costs included drug costs and costs of disease monitoring and management of adverse events throughout the treatment course. Costs were estimated from RED BOOK, Medicare reimbursement rates, and the literature and reported in 2017 U.S. dollars. Clinical effectiveness was measured in progression-free survival (PFS) life-years based on clinical trial results (NCT00753545, NCT01874353, and NCT01847274). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was computed by dividing the incremental cost by the incremental effectiveness.

resultsAt base case, niraparib was the more effective treatment option with slightly higher PFS, followed by olaparib. The ICERs for niraparib and olaparib compared with common baseline placebo were $235K and $287K per PFS life-year, respectively, with olaparib extended-dominated by niraparib. Both drugs were associated with lower ICERs in patients with a gBRCA mutation than in patients without a gBRCA mutation. One-way sensitivity analysis suggested that drug prices and PFS could affect ICERs significantly, but the ICERs remained above $100K per PFS life-year within the plausible ranges of all parameters. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that niraparib was associated with higher net benefits compared with placebo only when willingness-to-pay (WTP) values were above $210K per PFS life-year thresholds.

conclusionsPARP inhibitors niraparib and olaparib will extend PFS in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer patients but are also associated with high drug acquisition costs. The base case ICERs were around or above $250K per PFS life-year in this model. No formal cost-effectiveness WTP threshold for health technology assessment exists in the United States. At a reference WTP of $100K per PFS life-year, the PARP inhibitors may not be cost-effective options. DISCLOSURES: This study was unfunded. The authors have nothing to disclose.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansIndazolesModels, EconomicNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOvarian NeoplasmsPaclitaxelPhthalazinesPiperazinesPiperidinesPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsProgression-Free SurvivalUnited StatesIndazolesniraparibolaparibPaclitaxelPhthalazinesPiperazinesPiperidinesPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID30479195
PMCPMC10397875
OpenAlexW2903159081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.