Custo-efetividade do afatinibe versus pemetrexede associado a cisplatina, erlotinibe e gefitinibe no tratamento de primeira linha de pacientes com câncer de pulmão não pequenas células localmente avançado ou metastático, com mutação do receptor do fa

Abstract

Objective: To compare costs and effectiveness of afatinib versus pemetrexed plus cisplatin (PEM/ CIS), erlotinib and gefitinib, as first line treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor mutation (EGFR+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the Brazilian Private Healthcare System. Methods: A Markov model was used to estimate 7 year progression-free life years (PFLY), life years (LY), quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and clinical outcomes of afatinib. Partitioned survival, safety and utility data from the LUX-Lung 1, 3 and 6 and LUCEOR trials were used. Comparative effectiveness versus gefitinib and erlotinib was estimated using Bayesian indirect treatment comparison. Resource use was estimated by an expert panel and direct costs were estimated from official databases. Results: Compared with PEM/CIS, afatinib was associated with increased progression free survival (0.41 PFLY), increased overall survival (0.16 LY) and increased quality of life (0.21 QALY) with incremental cost (BRL 8,549), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of BRL 20.639/PFLY. Compared to erlotinib, afatinib was associated with additional 0.46 PFLY, 0.13 LY and 0.20 QALYs with lower cost (-BRL 21,327). When compared to gefitinib, afatinib was asso[1]ciated with incremental 0.53 PFLY, 0.37 LY and 0.34 QALY and increased cost (BRL 24,890), resulting in an ICER of BRL 46,709/PFLY. Considering 3 PIB per capita as a threshold (BRL 86,628), afatinib is a cost-effective technology versus PEM/CIS and gefitinib and dominant when compared to erlotinib. Conclusion: Findings suggest that afatinib is a cost-effective option, when compared to PEM/CIS, erlotinib and gefitinib, as first line treatment in EGFR+ NSCLC patients.