ArticleJournal of health economics and outcomes research2019
Cost-effectiveness analysis of ribociclib plus letrozole versus palbociclib plus letrozole in the United Kingdom.
Article in Journal of health economics and outcomes research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic evaluation of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors in advanced hormonal receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative breast cancer: a nationwide budget impact analysis.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of the addition of CDK4/6 inhibitors to standard endocrine therapy in first-line treatment of women with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer in Mexico.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Article
- Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of CDK4/6 inhibitors in the first-line treatment of HR-positive and HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: a Markov's model-based evaluation.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Cost Effectiveness of CDK4/6 Inhibitors in the First-Line Treatment of HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women in the USA.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Article
- Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Utility of Palbociclib versus Ribociclib in Women with Stage IV Breast Cancer: A Real-World Data Evaluation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Ribociclib in HER2- negative breast cancer: A synthesis of current evidence.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2022Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Ribociclib and Palbociclib in the Second-Line Treatment of Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer in Post-Menopausal Indian Women.Applied health economics and health policy · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Abemaciclib plus Fulvestrant versus Placebo plus Fulvestrant in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive, ERBB2-Negative Breast Cancer.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pharmacoeconomic evaluations of CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapy for advanced hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer: a systematic review.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Review
- CDK4/6 inhibitors: A potential therapeutic approach for triple negative breast cancer.MedComm · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ribociclib plus letrozole versus palbociclib plus letrozole in post-menopausal women with hormone receptor positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth receptor 2 negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer from a UK payer perspective.
methodsA cohort-based partitioned survival model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ribociclib plus letrozole versus palbociclib plus letrozole in post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer over a lifetime horizon. The analysis was carried out from a National Health Services and Personal Social Services perspective, and results are presented in incremental costs per quality adjusted life years. Clinical data from three randomized controlled trials (MONALEESA-2, PALOMA-1 and PALOMA-2 studies) were used, and supplemented with available real world evidence. Costs categories comprised of drug acquisition, medical management, and treatment of adverse events. Healthcare resource utilization data were identified from literature and unit costs sourced from secondary sources. Utility values were derived from MONALEESA-2 study and were supported with values identified from literature. Both deterministic and probabilistic analyses were carried out to assess uncertainty.
resultsIn the base case, treatment with ribociclib plus letrozole increased mean progression free survival (PFS) by 4.1 months and overall survival by 5.0 months compared to palbociclib plus letrozole. Further, treatment with ribociclib plus letrozole resulted in cost-savings of £8464 and incremental QALYs of 0.261, demonstrating that treatment with ribociclib plus letrozole is dominant to treatment with palbociclib plus letrozole. The probabilistic analysis also yielded mean cost-savings of £7914 and mean QALY gain of 0.273. At willingness-to-pay threshold of £30 000 per QALY, treatment with ribociclib plus letrozole had a 92% probability of being cost-effective compared to palbociclib and letrozole.
conclusionsThe results of the analysis demonstrate that ribociclib plus letrozole treatment is both cost-saving and a cost-effective option amongst the available cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors for the treatment of post-menopausal women with advanced breast cancer. The biggest driver of the cost savings were the lower acquisition costs of ribociclib.
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.