Cost-Effectiveness of Sorafenib, Lenvatinib, and FOLFOX4 for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in China
Abstract
Objective: Liver cancer is the third leading cause of cancer mortality in China. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of sorafenib, lenvatinib, and FOLFOX4 in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to inform clinical decision-making.
Material and Methods: We used a Markov model to simulate the progression of HCC and calculate Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) under two scenarios. Costs were obtained from the Yaozhi Network, while transition probabilities and utilities were derived from the REFLECT, EACH, and CELESTIAL clinical trials. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to evaluate model robustness and parameter uncertainty.
Results: In Scenario A, using market-listed prices, sorafenib, and lenvatinib were found to be more cost-effective than FOLFOX4, with ICERs of $11,635.28 and $1,499.93 per QALY, respectively, both below the cost-effectiveness threshold. In Scenario B, with centralized procurement prices, sorafenib had a negative ICER of -$7,351.26 per QALY, indicating cost savings with improved outcomes, while lenvatinib had an ICER of $2,685.99 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis revealed that drug costs, utilities of disease progression, and discount rates were key determinants of ICER values.
Conclusion: Sorafenib and lenvatinib are significantly more cost-effective compared to FOLFOX4, particularly under centralized procurement pricing. These results support the inclusion of these treatments in public health policy to enhance healthcare outcomes and optimize resource allocation, thereby improving the economic and quality-of-life metrics for patients with HCC.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Zhou J, Sun H, Wang Z, Cong W, Zeng M, Zhou W, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of primary liver cancer (2022 Edition). Liver Cancer 2023;12:405-44.
Abdelgalil AA, Alkahtani HM, Al-Jenoobi FI. Sorafenib. Profiles Drug Subst Excip Relat Methodol 2019;44:239-66.
Vogel A, Qin S, Kudo M, Su Y, Hudgens S, Yamashita T et al. Lenvatinib versus sorafenib for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: patient-reported outcomes from a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021;6:649-58.
Guo J, Zhao J, Xu Q, Huang D. Resistance of lenvatinib in hepatocellular carcinoma. Curr Cancer Drug Targets 2022;22:865-78.
Kudo M, Finn RS, Qin S, Han KH, Ikeda K, Piscaglia F, et al. Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2018;391:1163-73.
Chongqing Kangzhou Big Data. FOLFOX4 product information sheet [homepage on the Internat]. Chongqing: Chongqing Kangzhou Big Data; 2003 [cited 2024 Apr 10]. Available from: https://db.yaozh.com/clinicaldrug/bJaWaGNiZWFplWRilJaUmA==.html
Liu G, Hu S, Wu J. Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic evaluations in China (2011 version). Value Health 2011;3:6-48.
Qin S, Cheng Y, Liang J, Shen L, Bai Y, Li J, et al. Efficacy and safety of the FOLFOX4 regimen versus doxorubicin in Chinese patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of the EACH study. Oncologist 2014;19:1169-78.
Qin S, Bai Y, Lim HY, Kudo M, Chun MJ, Kim ST. Randomized, multicenter, open-label study of oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil/leucovorin versus doxorubicin as palliative chemotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma from Asia. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3501-8.
Baidu. USD to RMB exchange rate [homepage on the Internet]. Beijing: Baidu; 2024 [cited 2024 Apr 10]. Available from: https://gushitong.baidu.com/?quotationMarket=foreign&moduleName=quotation
Chongqing Kangzhou Big Data. Drug intelligence network [homepage on the Internat]. Chongqing: Chongqing Kangzhou Big Data; 2003 [cited 2024 Apr 10]. Available from: https://www.yaozh.com/
Liao W, Huang J, Hutton D, Zhu G, Wu Q, Wen F, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of cabozantinib as second-line therapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Int 2019;39:2408-16.
Leung HW, Liu CF, Chan AL. Cost-effectiveness of Sorafenib versus SBRT for unresectable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiat Oncol 2016;11:69.
Thompson Coon J, Hoyle M, Green C, Liu Z, Welch K, Moxham T, et al. Bevacizumab, Sorafenib Tosylate, Sunitinib, and Temsirolimus for renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2010;14:1-184. doi:10.3310/hta14020.
National Bureau of Statistics of China. Announcement on the final verification of GDP for 2022 [homepage on the Internet]. Beijing: National Bureau of Statistics of China; 2022 [cited 2024 Apr 10]. Available from: https://www.stats.gov.cn/english/PressRelease/202401/t20240110_1946428.html
Qin S, Cao M, Qian J, Li X, Wang L, Zhang Y, et al. Oxaliplatin-based FOLFOX regimen for the treatment of advanced primary liver cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;1:58-60.
Sun Z, Na X, Chu S. Impact of China's national centralized drug procurement policy on pharmaceutical enterprises' financial performance: a quasi-natural experimental study. Front Public Health 2023;11:1227102. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1227102.
Chen L, Yang Y, Luo M, Hu B, Yin S, Mao Z. The impacts of national centralized drug procurement policy on drug utilization and drug expenditures: the case of Shenzhen, China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:9415. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17249415.
Gong H, Ong SC, Li F, Weng Z, Zhao K, Jiang Z, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of sorafenib, lenvatinib, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and sintilimab plus bevacizumab for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2023;21:20.
Qin S, Bai Y, Lim HY, Thongprasert S, Chao Y, Fan J, et al. Randomized, multicenter, open-label study of oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil/leucovorin versus doxorubicin as palliative chemotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma from Asia. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3501-8.
Claxton K, Sculpher M, McCabe C, Briggs A, Akehurst R, Buxton M, et al. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra. Health Econ 2005;14:339-47.
Fu Y, Jin C, Sun H, Wang X, Zhang J, Li Y. Comprehensive clinical evaluation of first-line systemic treatment drugs for advanced liver cancer. J Clin Drug Ther 2021;36:245-50.
Liu G, Hu S, Wu J. Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic evaluations in China. China Pharmacoecon 2020;3:6-48.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.