URGENT: We need to hear from you!  Share your story to help ASCO defend federal cancer research funding.

Background: The EMILIA trial demonstrated T-DM1 significantly increased in median profession-free (3.2 months) and overall (5.8 months) survival relative to combination therapy with lapatinib plus capecitabine (LC) in patients with HER2-positive ABC previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. We performed an economic analysis of T-DM1 compared to LC and monotherapy with capecitabine (C) from both US payer and societal perspectives. Methods: We developed 4 possible Markov models to compare the projected lifetime costs and outcomes of T-DM1 and LC, and C. Markov models 1 and 2 have four health states (progression-free, response to therapy, disease-progression, and death), and Markov models 3 and 4 have three health states (progression-free, disease-progression, and death). In models 1 and 3, the possibility of death can occur in any health state; while in models 2 and 4, death can only occur in disease-progressing health state. Transition probabilities were estimated from published relevant trials. Six-week cycle time was modeled to follow the assessment time interval in the trials. Direct costs of the therapies, major adverse events, laboratory tests, and disease progression, indirect costs (productivity losses due to morbidity and mortality), and health utilities were obtained from published sources. The models used 3% discount rate and reported in 2014 US dollars. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed in the study. Results: When incorporating both model structural and parameter uncertainty, the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) comparing T-DM1 to LC and T-DM1 to C were $172,152 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and $126,251/QALY from the US societal perspective, respectively. From the US payer perspective, the ICERs were $205,598/QALY (T-DM1 vs. LC) and $164,628/QALY (T-DM1 vs. C). (See Table) Conclusions: From the US societal perspective, T-DM1 may be cost-effective relative to C. However, T-DM1 is not clearly cost-effective when comparing to LC from both perspectives.

Treatment RegimenLifetime Direct Cost ($)Lifetime Indirect Cost ($)QALYs
T-DM1270,63027,3352.04
LC180,20242,0461.60
C101,96666,6531.01

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Author Details

Quang Anh Le

Western Univ of Health Sci, Pomona, CA

Abstract Details

Meeting

2015 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Health Services Research and Quality of Care

Track

Health Services Research and Quality of Care

View More

Abstract Disclosure