Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30744578›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2019

Cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel for the first-line treatment of HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in specialist oncology centers in France.

Audrey Petitjean, Jayne Smith-Palmer, William Valentine, Bertrand Tehard, Stephané Roze

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03275311 (Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economic), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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.

NCT03275311 recruitingnot on this map

Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economic (ESME) Research Program / Academic Real World Database: Evolution of the Therapeutic Care in Metastatic Breast Cancer Across the French Comprehensive Cancer Centers From 2008

TypeobservationalSponsorUNICANCERRan2014 to 2027Enrolled42,000ConditionsMetastatic Breast Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Systematic Review of the Cost Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Prevention, Screening, and Treatment Interventions.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Audrey PetitjeanHEVA HEOR, Lyon, France.
Jayne Smith-PalmerOssian Health Economics and Communications GmbH, Basel, Switzerland. smith-palmer@ossianconsulting.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6049-1241
William ValentineOssian Health Economics and Communications GmbH, Basel, Switzerland.
Bertrand TehardRoche SAS, Boulogne Billancourt, France.
Stephané RozeHEVA HEOR, Lyon, France.
Federal Department of Finance · CHRoche (France) · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence from clinical trials suggests that the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer improves progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS). However, a retrospective analysis of real-world data from the French Comprehensive Cancer Centers (FCCC) through the Epidemiological Strategy and Medical Economics (ESME) Research Program, suggested that in this setting, the addition of bevacizumab may confer a significant benefit in terms of both PFS and OS. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to determine the cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone in the first-line treatment of HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer at specialist oncology centers in France.

methodsThe analysis was performed using a three-state Markov model and clinical input data from N = 3426 HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer patients treated with bevacizumab plus paclitaxel or paclitaxel alone. The analysis was performed from a third party payer perspective over a 10-year time horizon; future costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 4% per annum.

resultsIn the overall population, the addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel led to incremental gain of 0.72 life years and 0.48 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) relative to paclitaxel alone. The incremental lifetime cost of the addition of bevacizumab was EUR 27,390, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of EUR 56,721 per QALY gained for bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone. In a subgroup of triple negative patients the ICER was EUR 66,874 per QALY gained.

conclusionsThe analysis indicated that the combination of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel is likely to be cost-effective compared with paclitaxel alone for the first-line treatment of HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in specialized oncology centers in France.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBevacizumabBreast NeoplasmsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleFranceHumansMarkov ChainsMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingPaclitaxelPopulation SurveillanceBevacizumabErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesPaclitaxelBevacizumabBreast cancerCostCost-effectivenessFrance

Identifiers

PMID30744578
PMCPMC6371553
OpenAlexW2922020001

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.