A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab compared with bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer in the US

Abstract

Aims: This analysis investigated the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin) compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in the first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

Materials and methods: The cost-effectiveness analysis was developed from a third-party payer perspective in the US and was implemented using a partitioned survival model with health states for first-line treatment (progression-free), disease progression with and without subsequent active treatment, and death. Survival analyses of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC from the PEAK head-to-head clinical trial of panitumumab vs bevacizumab were performed to estimate time in the model health states. Additional data from PEAK informed the amount of each drug consumed, duration of therapy, subsequent therapy use, and toxicities related to mCRC treatment. Literature and US public data sources were used to estimate unit costs associated with treatment and duration of subsequent active therapies. Utility weights were calculated from patient-level data from panitumumab trials in the first-, second-, and third-line settings. A life-time perspective was taken with future costs and outcomes discounted at 3% per annum. Scenario, one-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results: Compared with bevacizumab, the use of panitumumab resulted in an incremental cost of US $60,286, and an incremental quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of 0.445, translating into a cost per QALY gained of US $135,391 in favor of panitumumab. Results were sensitive to wastage and dose rounding assumptions modeled.

Limitations: Progression-free and overall survival were extrapolated beyond the follow-up of the primary analysis using fitted parametric curves. Costs and quality of life were estimated from multiple and different data sources.

Conclusions: The efficacy of panitumumab in extending progression-free and overall survival and improving quality of life makes it a cost-effective option for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC compared with bevacizumab.

Keywords:

• Panitumumab
• wild-type RAS
• outcomes
• cost-effectiveness
• first-line therapy
• metastatic colorectal cancer

JEL CLASSIFICATION:

• D61
• I12
• I18

Transparency

Declaration of funding

This study was conducted by RTI Health Solutions (RTI-HS) under the direction of Amgen Inc. and was funded by Amgen Inc. RTI-HS receives funding from pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device companies to conduct pharmacoeconomic and outcomes research studies, including funding for this analysis.

Declaration of financial/other interests

CNG and HNK are employees of RTI Health Solutions. HNK received sponsorship and research funding from Amgen Inc. for this analysis. AC, GH, and TG are employees of Amgen Inc.; AC and GH also own stock in the company. LS is an employee of Amgen GmbH. JHS is a consultant/advisory board member for Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Bayer, Celgene, Chugai, and Genentech/Roche, and has received research funding from AbbVie, Exelixis, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Leap Therapeutics, Macrogenics, MedImmune, OncoMed, Sanofi Genzyme, and Seattle Genetics. Peer reviewers on this manuscript have received an honorarium from JME for their review work, but have no other relevant financial relationships to disclose.