Validation of cost-effectiveness of trifluridine/tipiracil versus best supportive care and regorafenib for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer in the UK using phase IIIb PRECONNECT early access clinical trial data in the real world setting.

Authors

null

Javier Sabater

Global Market Access, Paris, France

Javier Sabater , Lewis Ralph , Rachael Batteson , Grant McCarthy , Jaro Wex , Shanti Ricardo Moreno Vera , Martin Becquart , Nadjat Mounedji , Julien Taieb , Marc Peeters , Alfredo Falcone

Organizations

Global Market Access, Paris, France, BresMed, Sheffield, United Kingdom, BresMed, Shefield, United Kingdom, Oncovery, Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Chesham, United Kingdom, Global Medical Affairs Oncology, Suresnes, France, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Sorbonne Paris Cite/Paris Descartes University, Paris, France, Department of Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Pisa, Italy

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) is indicated and recommended for the treatment of previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previous evaluations used pooled clinical evidence from the Phase III (RECOURSE) and Phase II trials to model cost-effectiveness, but FTD/TPI specific utilities were not available and alternative data sources were used. The aim of this study was to utilize EQ-5D data from an ongoing Phase IIIb trial (PRECONNECT) within an updated cost-effectiveness model to validate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes for mCRC patients receiving FTD/TPI. Methods: EQ-5D-3L data from PRECONNECT trial were analyzed with UK utility tariff applied. Pre- and post-progression health state utilities were estimated using a linear mixed effects regression model. Indirect comparison versus regorafenib was based on evidence from the CORRECT trial. Utilities and UK costs (GBP, 2018) were then implemented into the existing economic model. Results: Mean pre-progression and post-progression utilities were 0.72 and 0.59, respectively, with discounted incremental quality adjusted life years gain of 2.1 months versus best supportive care (BSC) and 0.8 versus regorafenib. Use of FTD/TPI based on PRECONNECT data, as in the previous analysis, was associated with improved mean survival pre-progression (by 1.8 months) and post-progression (by 1.4 months) for the total OS gain of 3.2 months versus BSC. The mean OS gain versus regorafenib was 1.4 months. Updated cost-effectiveness analysis using PRECONNECT derived inputs showed that results remained broadly unchanged with a negligible increase in ICER from £51,589 to £51,792 (£51,101 in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis) when compared to BSC, while FTD/TPI remained dominant (more effective and less costly) versus regorafenib. Conclusions: New HRQoL data from the PRECONNECT study collected in a real-world setting validated previous HRQoL inputs used to model cost-effectiveness of FTD/TPI in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT03306394

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2019 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session C: Cancers of the Colon, Rectum, and Anus

Track

Cancers of the Colon, Rectum, and Anus

Sub Track

Multidisciplinary Treatment

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT03306394

Citation

J Clin Oncol 37, 2019 (suppl 4; abstr 639)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2019.37.4_suppl.639

Abstract #

639

Poster Bd #

L4

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Christopher Duane Nevala-Plagemann

Abstract

2024 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Real world effectiveness of regorafenib in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

First Author: Anastasia Danilova