Cetuximab in the Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: a Model-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

References

• Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Estimating the world cancer burden. Int J Cancer 2001; 94: 153–156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferlay J, Bray F, Pisani P, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2000: Cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide. IARC Cancer Base No.5. Lyon. IARC Press 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham D, Humblet Y, Siena S, et al. Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 337–345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang SM, Harari PM. Epidermal growth factor recep-tor inhibition in cancer therapy: biology, rationale and prelimi-nary clinical results. Invest New Drugs 1999; 17: 259–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castillo L, Etienne-Grimaldi MC, Fischel JL, Formento P, Magnê N, Milano G. Pharmacological backgound of EGFR targeting. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1007–1012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prewett MC, Hooper AT, Bassi R, Ellis LM, Waksal HW, Hicklin DJ. Enhanced antitumor activity of anti-epider-mal growth factor receptor monoclinal antibody IMC-C225 in combination with irinotecan (CPT-11) against human colorec-tal tumor xenografts. Clin Cancer Res 2002; 8: 994–1003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drummond MF, O'Brian B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care pro-grammes. Oxford Medical Publications, Third edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York,Toronto 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin EH, Doroshow J, Hidalgo M, et al. A study to access the pharmokinetics (PK) of a single infusion of cetux-imab (IMC-C225). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2004; 22; a3084.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenz HJ, Mayer J, Gold J, et al. Activity of cetuximab in patients with colorectal cancer refractory to both irinotecan and oxaliplatin. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2004; 22; a3510.1°
   Google Scholar
• Tabernero JM, Van Cutsem E, Sastre J, et al. An inter-national phase II study of cetuximab in combination with oxali-platin/5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) (FOLFOX-4) in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) expressing Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR). Preliminary results. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2004, 22; a3512.
   Google Scholar
• Badarinath S, Mitchell EP, Jennis A, et al. Cetuximab plus FOLFOX for colorectal cancer (EXPLORE). Preliminary safety analysis of a randomised phase III trial. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2004; 22; a3531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rougier P, Raoul JL, Van Laethem JL, et al. Cetuximab + FOLFIRI as first-line treatment for metastatic col-orectal CA. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 20004; 22; a3513.
   Google Scholar
• Mirtsching B, Headlee C, Beasley S, Teel C, Jackson D. Cetuximab single-agent in refractory metastatic colorectal can-cer. Single-center experience. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2004; 22: a3703.
   Google Scholar
• Saltz L, Rubin M, Hochster H, et al. Cetuximab article (IMC-C225) plus irinotecan (CPT-11) is active in CPT-11 refractory colorectal cancer (CRC) that expresses epidermal growth fac-tor receptor (EGFR). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2001; 20: a7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow NH, Chan Sh, Tzai TS, Ho CL, Liu HS. Expresion profiles of ErbB family receptors and prognosis in primary transitional cell carcinomas of the urinary bladder. Clin Cancer Res 2001; 7: 1957–1962.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltz L, Meropol NJ, Lochrer PJ, et al. Phase II trial of cetuximab in patients with refractory colorectal cancer that expresses the epidermal growth factor receptor. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 1201–1208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Insurance Administration, Rikstrygdeverket: [cited 2004 Dec 15]; Available from: URL: http://www.trygdeetaten.no
   Google Scholar
• The National Health Administration: The tariff of public out-patient treatment valid from January 1” 2004. Oslo, The National Health Administration, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Norum J, Olsen JA. A cost-effectiveness approach to the Norwegian follow-up programme in colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol 1997; 8: 1081–1087.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messa C, Russo F, Caruso MG, DiLeo A. EGF, TGF-alpha and EGF-R in human colorectal adenocarcinoma. Acta Oncol 1998; 37: 285–289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salomon DS, Brandt R, Ciardiello F, Normanno N: Epidermal growth factor related peptides and their receptors in human malignancies. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 1995; 19: 183–232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenz HJ, Mayer J, Gold J, et al. Activity of cetuximab in patients with colorectal cancer refractory to both irinotecan and oxaliplatin. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2004; 22; a3510.
   Google Scholar
• Schrag D. The price tag on progress - chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 317–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bazell R. Strange medicine. Why are the new cancer drugs so expensive? MSN. [cited 2005 Jan 23]; Available from: URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2102844.
   Google Scholar
• Chapman RH, Berger M, Weinstein MC, et al. When does quality-adjusting life matters in cost-effectiveness analysis? Health Econ 2004; 13: 429–436.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkelmayer WC, Weinstein MC, Mittleman MA, et al. Health economic evaluations: the special case of end-stage renal disease treatment. Med Decis Making 2002 22: 417–430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadler ES, Eckert B, Neumann PJ. Do oncologists believe new cancer drugs offer good value? Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2005; 23: a6011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erlichman C, Sargent DJ. New treatment options for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 391–392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cunningham D, Pyrhonen S, James R, et al. Randomised trial of irinotecan plus supportive care versus sup-portive care alone after fluorouracil failure for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Lancet 1998; 352, 1413–1418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar