Search

Background: The burden of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not well understood, and the number of patients likely to receive treatment in Europe has not been quantified. The aim of this study was to forecast the annual number of patients with squamous and non-squamous advanced NSCLC likely to receive second and third lines of therapy (LOT) from 2016 to 2020 in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. Methods: A patient count model (PCM) was developed in Microsoft Excel to estimate the number of patients with refractory advanced NSCLC eligible to receive systemic treatment. Using historical population-based cancer registry data, segmented linear regression ("Joinpoint") was used to forecast age- and sex-stratified lung cancer incidence rates in each country through 2020. Yearly incident case count totals by country were apportioned according to NSCLC histology and stage at diagnosis. Country-specific treatment rates came from a recent medical chart review study, and early- to advanced-stage disease progression rates were estimated over a 10-year interval. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed to estimate variability in the patient counts. Results: The combined number of squamous and non-squamous advanced NSCLC patients estimated to receive second and third LOT, respectively, in 2016 were France = 11,600 and 3500; Germany = 15,100 and 4900; Italy = 13,500 and 2500; Spain = 9400 and 2100. The forecasted numbers of patients receiving second and third LOT, respectively, in 2020 were France = 13,900 and 4200; Germany = 16,200 and 5200; Italy = 15,100 and 2600; Spain = 11,000 and 2500. Conclusions: Driven by growth in the incidence of NSCLC among women, the model forecasts an overall increase in the number of patients with advanced-stage squamous and non-squamous NSCLC likely to receive systemic treatment in the year 2020. The results highlight the significant burden of refractory advanced NSCLC and the need for more robust surveillance data to accurately quantify the burden of disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Chronic pain is known to be a significant and common health problem. Tapentadol, a recently developed centrally active, oral analgesic agent is used to treat adults with severe chronic pain that can be adequately managed only with opioid analgesics. Tapentadol has been reported to provide an improved adverse-events (AE) profile compared with other potent opioid analgesics at similar levels of analgesia. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of tapentadol to that of opioids commonly used as first-line treatment of severe, chronic, nonmalignant pain from the perspective of the health care payer in Spain. Methods: A Markov state-transition model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of first-line treatment with tapentadol to that of oxycodone, morphine, and transdermal fentanyl (TDF) over a 1-year time horizon. Four health states were defined: (1) treatment discontinuation due to a severe AE; (2) treatment discontinuation due to a lack of efficacy; (3) occurrence of an AE that required medical treatment; and (4) no discontinuation and no AE. If a patient discontinued a treatment, he or she was switched to an alternative, second-line opioid. Data regarding efficacy, tolerability, and utility values (EQ-5D) were derived from randomized clinical trials. Clinical experts estimated the rates of switching to other opioids and the health care resource utilization associated with the treatment of severe chronic pain. Unit costs were derived from public price lists/tariff works and were calculated from the perspective of the National Spanish Health System. The robustness of the model results was tested in extensive sensitivity analyses in which event probabilities, costs, utilities, and treatment-switching rates were altered. Results: Data from 3 studies (1981 patients) were included in the model. Overall, the model predicted that initiating first-line treatment with tapentadol in patients with severe, chronic, nonmalignant pain was associated with lower costs and greater efficacy versus first-line treatment with oxycodone. Compared with morphine and TDF, tapentadol yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €2656 and €2069 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. On extensive 1-way and scenario analyses, findings on the cost-effectiveness of tapentadol were consistent. The probability that tapentadol would be cost-effective compared with each comparator at the willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 to €30,000/QALY gained exceeded 90%. Conclusions: Based on the findings from the present model, tapentadol is likely to be a cost-effective first-line treatment in patients with severe, chronic, nonmalignant pain in Spain according to the commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds. Compared with morphine and TDF, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were low; compared with oxycodone, tapentadol dominated, showing better quality-of-life outcomes at lower costs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]