The economic value of knowing BRCA status: BRCA testing for optimizing treatment in recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer

References

• Khalique S, Hook JM, Ledermann JA. Maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer. Curr Opin Oncol. 2014;26(5):521–528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman RL, Oza AM, Lorusso D, et al. Rucaparib maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian carcinoma after response to platinum therapy (ARIEL3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2017;390(10106):1949–1961.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirza MR, Monk BJ, Herrstedt J, et al. Niraparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(22):2154–2164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ledermann J, Harter P, Gourley C, et al. Olaparib maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer: a preplanned retrospective analysis of outcomes by BRCA status in a randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(8):852–861.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhong L, Tran AT, Tomasino T, et al. Cost-effectiveness of niraparib and olaparib as maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. J Manag Care and Specialty Pharm. 2018;24(12):1219–1228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guy H, Walder L, Fisher M. Cost-effectiveness of niraparib versus routine surveillance, olaparib and rucaparib for the maintenance treatment of patients with ovarian cancer in the United States. PharmacoEconomics. 2019;37(3):391–405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith HJ, Walters Haygood CL, Arend RC, et al. PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis. In: Gynecologic Oncology. 2015. 139. Academic Press Inc. 59–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penn CA, Wong MS, Walsh CS. Cost-effectiveness of maintenance therapy based on molecular classification following treatment of primary epithelial ovarian cancer in the United States. JAMA Network Open. 2020;3(12):e2028620.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams C, Lewsey JD, Mackay DF, et al. Estimation of survival probabilities for use in cost-effectiveness analyses: a comparison of a multi-state modeling survival analysis approach with partitioned survival and Markov decision-analytic modeling. Med Decis Mak. 2017;37(4):427–439.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woods B, Sideris E, Palmer S, et al. NICE DSU TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT 19: PARTITIONED SURVIVAL ANALYSIS FOR DECISION MODELLING IN HEALTH CARE: a CRITICAL REVIEW REPORT BY THE DECISION SUPPORT UNIT NICE Decision Support Unit; 2017. www.nicedsu.org.uk Accessed 2021 May 13
   Google Scholar
• Ledermann JA, Harter P, Gourley C, et al. Overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer receiving olaparib maintenance monotherapy: an updated analysis from a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(11):1579–1589.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• **.
   Google Scholar
• Pyenson B, Connor S, Fitch K, et al. Medicare cost in matched hospice and non-hospice cohorts. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2004;28(3):200–210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overview | Olaparib for maintenance treatment of relapsed, platinum-sensitive, BRCA mutation-positive ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal cancer after response to second-line or subsequent platinum-based chemotherapy | guidance | NICE
   Google Scholar
• Atimer N. NICE DSU TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT 14: SURVIVAL ANALYSIS FOR ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS ALONGSIDE CLINICAL TRIALS-EXTRAPOLATION WITH PATIENT-LEVEL DATA REPORT BY THE DECISION SUPPORT UNIT.; 2011. www.nicedsu.org.uk. Accessed 2021 May 13
   Google Scholar
• Alsop K, Fereday S, Meldrum C, et al. BRCA mutation frequency and patterns of treatment response in BRCA mutation-positive women with ovarian cancer: a report from the Australian ovarian cancer study group. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(21):2654–2663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehta DA, Hay JW. Cost-effectiveness of adding bevacizumab to first line therapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132(3):677–683.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The world ovarian cancer coalition atlas global trends in incidence, mortality and survival.; 2018
   Google Scholar
• Drummond M, Weatherly H, Ferguson B. Economic evaluation of health interventions. BMJ. 2008;337:a1204.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Briggs A, Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: statistical representation of parameter uncertainty. Value Health. 8(1):1–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington KP, Walsh T, Harrell MI, et al. Germline and somatic mutations in homologous recombination genes predict platinum response and survival in ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20(3):764–775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Havrilesky LJ, Broadwater G, Davis DM, et al. Determination of quality of life-related utilities for health states relevant to ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;113(2):216–220.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manchanda R, Patel S, Gordeev V, et al. Cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 mutation testing in unselected general population women. Jnci. 2018;110(7):714–725.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Micromedex IBM RED BOOK - Overview - United States. https://www.ibm.com/us-en/marketplace/micromedex-red-book. Accessed October 13, 2020
   Google Scholar
• Rashid N, Koh HA, Baca HC, et al. Economic burden related to chemotherapy-related adverse events in patients with metastatic breast cancer in an integrated health care system. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press). 2016;8:173–181.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yabroff KR, Davis WW, Lamont EB, et al. Patient time costs associated with cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(1):14–23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guyot P, Ades AE, Ouwens MJNM, et al. Enhanced secondary analysis of survival data: reconstructing the data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves. BMC medical research methodology. 2012;12:9.
   Google Scholar
• Smith SG, Sestak I, Forster A, et al. Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(4):575–590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer price index for All Urban consumers: medical Care in U.S. City average [CPIMEDSL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CPIMEDSL, Accessed 2021 May 13
   Google Scholar
• Ovarian Cancer - Cancer Stat Facts. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/ovary.html. Accessed October 14, 2019
   Google Scholar
• GDP per capita (current US$) | Data. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?page=1. Accessed 19 October 2019
   Google Scholar
• Yabroff KR, Kim Y. Time costs associated with informal caregiving for cancer survivors. Cancer. 2009;115(18 Suppl):4362–4373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frasco MA, Shih T, Incerti D, et al. Incremental net monetary benefit of ocrelizumab relative to subcutaneous interferon β-1a. J Med Econ. 2017Oct;20 10:1074–1082. Epub 2017 Aug 4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harter P, Mouret-Reynier MA, Pignata S, et al. Efficacy of maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab according to clinical risk in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer in the phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2022Feb;1642:254–264. Epub 2021 Dec 22. PMID: 34952708
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penn CA, Wong MS, Walsh CS. Cost-effectiveness of maintenance therapy based on molecular classification following treatment of primary epithelial ovarian cancer in the United States. JAMA Network Open. 2020Dec1;3(12):e2028620. PMID: 33295974; PMCID: PMC7726632.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Handorf EA, Heitjan DF, Bekelman JE, et al. Estimating cost-effectiveness from claims and registry data with measured and unmeasured confounders. Stat Methods Med Res. 2019;28(7):2227–2242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson S, Nixon R. How sensitive are cost-effectiveness analyses to choice of parametric distributions? Med Decis Making. 2005 Jul-Aug;25(4):416–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders GD, Neumann PJ, Basu A, et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA. 2016;316(10):1093–1103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briggs A, Schulper M, Klaxton C. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. In: Oxford: Oxford University Press. New York: Oxford University Press. 2006. p. 129–130.
   Google Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Discounting of health benefits in special circumstances. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta235/resources/osteosarcoma-mifamurtide-discounting-of-health-benefits-in-special-circumstances2. Accessed 19 Sep 2021
   Google Scholar
• V.A. National Acquisition Center Contract Catalog Search Tool. https://www.vendorportal.ecms.va.gov/NAC/Pharma/List?cboContractNumbers=&cboContractorNames=&txtCriteria1=olaparib&TxtNDC=&txtPackage=&cboVAClass=&Sort=1&search=Search. Accessed October 13, 2019
   Google Scholar