180P - Pharmacoeconomic analysis of XELOX versus FOLFOX for metastatic colorectal cancer first-line treatment in Taiwan

Date 19 December 2015
Event ESMO Asia 2015 Congress
Session Poster presentation 1
Topics Anti-Cancer Agents & Biologic Therapy
Bioethics, Legal, and Economic Issues
Colon Cancer
Rectal Cancer
Presenter Hong-Hwa Chen
Citation Annals of Oncology (2015) 26 (suppl_9): 42-70. 10.1093/annonc/mdv523
Authors H. Chen1, C. Chang2, L. Chen3, W.T. Chen4, T. Hsu5, J. Wang6
  • 1Department Of Colorectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital-Kaohsiung, 833 - Kaohsiung/TW
  • 2Crs, Changhua Christian Hospital Cancer Research Center, Changhua City/TW
  • 3Colon & Rectal Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung/TW
  • 4Crs, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung/TW
  • 5Crs, Taipei Medical Unversity Hospital, Taipei/TW
  • 6Crs, Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital,Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung/TW

Abstract

Aim/Background

XELOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) has been shown in study NO16966 to be non-inferior to FOLFOX-4 (5-FU/LV plus oxaliplatin) for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We developed a pharmacoeconomic model to compare direct costs of XELOX with FOLFOX-4 from the payer's perspective in Taiwan.

Methods

Two complementary cost-minimization analyses were performed to compare the costs of XELOX with FOLFOX-4, both using costs for Taiwan: one looking at the medical resource utilization of these regimens in Taiwan, and the other based on safety/efficacy data from NO16966. Local treatment regimens and drug administration patterns were derived from the results of an expert panel survey conducted among Taiwanese physicians. Unit costs were estimated from the 2009 Taiwan Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI) fee schedules. Direct medical costs were associated with the drugs, administration, and adverse event management.

Results

Although XELOX had higher drug costs, these were offset by the higher chemotherapy administration costs for FOLFOX-4, resulting in an overall cost saving with XELOX of NT$35,091 ($1,170; NT$30 = ∼1US$) by 6 months. For the analysis based on NO16966, this difference was NT$71,285 ($2,376).

Conclusions

XELOX for the first-line treatment of mCRC can effectively release the budget pressure for Taiwan's BNHI.

Clinical trial identification

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.