IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v36y2018i3d10.1007_s40273-017-0592-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pegylated Liposomal Irinotecan Hydrochloride Trihydrate for Treating Pancreatic Cancer After Gemcitabine: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Nigel Fleeman

    (University of Liverpool)

  • Ahmed Abdulla

    (University of Liverpool)

  • Adrian Bagust

    (University of Liverpool)

  • Sophie Beale

    (University of Liverpool)

  • Marty Richardson

    (University of Liverpool)

  • Angela Stainthorpe

    (University of Liverpool)

  • Angela Boland

    (University of Liverpool)

  • Eleanor Kotas

    (University of Liverpool)

  • Joanne McEntee

    (North West Medicines Information Centre)

  • Daniel Palmer

    (University of Liverpool)

Abstract

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer (Shire Pharmaceuticals) of pegylated liposomal irinotecan hydrochloride trihydrate (liposomal irinotecan) to submit clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence for its use in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and folic acid/leucovorin (LV) for treating patients with pancreatic cancer following prior treatment with gemcitabine as part of the institute’s Single Technology Appraisal process. The Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group at the University of Liverpool was commissioned to act as the Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article presents a summary of the company’s evidence, the ERG review and the resulting NICE guidance (TA440), issued on 26 April 2017. Clinical evidence for liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV versus 5-FU/LV was derived from 236 patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer in the multinational, open-label, randomised controlled NAPOLI-1 trial. Results from analyses of progression-free survival and overall survival showed statistically significant improvements for patients treated with liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV compared with those treated with 5-FU/LV. However, 5-FU/LV alone is rarely used in National Health Service clinical practice for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer previously treated with gemcitabine. The company, ERG and Appraisal Committee (AC) all agreed that oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV is the most commonly used treatment. Oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV was compared with 5-FU/LV in two trials identified by the company. However, the company and the ERG both considered attempts to compare the efficacy of liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV with oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV to be methodologically flawed; not only was there heterogeneity between trials and their populations but also the proportional hazards assumption required to conduct a robust indirect treatment comparison (ITC) was violated. Nonetheless, data derived from an ITC were used to inform the company’s economic model. Using the discounted patient access scheme price for liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV, the company reported an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained of £54,412 for the comparison with oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV. The ERG considered that the company’s base-case cost-effectiveness results for the comparison of liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV versus oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV were underestimates and should be interpreted with extreme caution. Following implementation of a number of model amendments, the ERG’s modified exploratory ICER for the comparison of liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV versus oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV was £106,898 per QALY gained. The AC accepted the majority of the ERG’s amendments to the model, and also highlighted that the total QALYs for oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV were lower than for 5-FU/LV in the company’s model, which the AC considered to be clinically implausible. The AC therefore considered results from exploratory analyses, undertaken by the ERG, which included altering the QALY difference between liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV and oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV by ± 10%. These analyses resulted in ICERs for the comparison of liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV versus oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV of between £201,019 per QALY gained to liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV being dominated by oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV. Therefore, despite uncertainty around the clinical-effectiveness evidence and cost-effectiveness results, the AC was confident that the ICER was in excess of £50,000 per QALY gained. The final guidance issued by NICE is that liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV is not recommended within its marketing authorisation for treating metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas in adults whose disease has progressed after gemcitabine-based therapy.

Suggested Citation

  • Nigel Fleeman & Ahmed Abdulla & Adrian Bagust & Sophie Beale & Marty Richardson & Angela Stainthorpe & Angela Boland & Eleanor Kotas & Joanne McEntee & Daniel Palmer, 2018. "Pegylated Liposomal Irinotecan Hydrochloride Trihydrate for Treating Pancreatic Cancer After Gemcitabine: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 289-299, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0592-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0592-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-017-0592-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-017-0592-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Unknown, 2016. "Department Publications 2014," Publications Lists 239845, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kaplan, Jonathan D. & Norton, Max & Baumgartner, Kendra, 2018. "An ounce of prevention and a pound of cure: the substitutability or complementarity of grapevine trunk disease management practices," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274361, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Hongxing Liu & Wendong Zhang & Elena Irwin & Jeffrey Kast & Noel Aloysius & Jay Martin & Margaret Kalcic, 2020. "Best Management Practices and Nutrient Reduction: An Integrated Economic-Hydrologic Model of the Western Lake Erie Basin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 96(4), pages 510-530.
    3. Robert Koulish, 2016. "Using Risk to Assess the Legal Violence of Mandatory Detention," Laws, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-20, July.
    4. José Armando Cobián Álvarez & Budy P. Resosudarmo, 2019. "The cost of floods in developing countries’ megacities: a hedonic price analysis of the Jakarta housing market, Indonesia," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 21(4), pages 555-577, October.
    5. Marius Dan Gavriletea, 2017. "Environmental Impacts of Sand Exploitation. Analysis of Sand Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-26, June.
    6. D. Lee & A. Amadi & J. Sabater & J. Ellis & H. Johnson & S. Kotapati & S. McNamara & A. Walker & M. Cooper & K. Patterson & N. Roskell & Y. Meng, 2019. "Can We Accurately Predict Cost Effectiveness Without Access to Overall Survival Data? The Case Study of Nivolumab in Combination with Ipilimumab for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Melanoma in," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 43-54, March.
    7. B Ian Hutchins & Xin Yuan & James M Anderson & George M Santangelo, 2016. "Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-25, September.
    8. BARCEVICIUS Egidijus & CIBAITE Guonda & CODAGNONE Cristiano & GINEIKYTE Vaida & KLIMAVICIUTE Luka & LIVA Giovanni & MATULEVIC Loreta & MISURACA Gianluca & VANINI Irene, 2019. "Exploring Digital Government transformation in the EU," JRC Research Reports JRC118857, Joint Research Centre.
    9. Manfred Spiesberger & Javier Gomez Prieto & Isabelle Seigneur, 2018. "Smart specialisation and social innovation: from policy relations to opportunities and challenges," JRC Research Reports JRC111371, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Celene Y. L. Yap & Ya-seng (Arthur) Hsueh & Jonathan C. Knott & David McD Taylor & Esther W. Chan & David C. M. Kong, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Midazolam–Droperidol Combination, Versus Droperidol or Olanzapine for the Management of Acute Agitation in the Emergency Department: A Within-Trial Analysis," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 141-151, June.
    11. Hamrick, Karen S. & McClelland, Ket, 2016. "Americans' Eating Patterns and Time Spent on Food: The 2014 Eating & Health Module Data," Economic Information Bulletin 262141, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    12. Claire Greene & Scott Schuh, 2017. "The 2016 Diary of Consumer Payment Choice," Research Data Report 17-7, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    13. Christopher Carroll & Paul Tappenden & Rachid Rafia & Jean Hamilton & Duncan Chambers & Mark Clowes & Paul Durrington & Nadeem Qureshi & Anthony S. Wierzbicki, 2017. "Evolocumab for Treating Primary Hypercholesterolaemia and Mixed Dyslipidaemia: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 537-547, May.
    14. Iwona Szumacher & Piotr Pabjanek, 2017. "Temporal Changes in Ecosystem Services in European Cities in the Continental Biogeographical Region in the Period from 1990–2012," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-14, April.
    15. Merryn Maynard & Jennifer Dean & Paulina I. Rodriguez & Gobika Sriranganathan & Mona Qutub & Sharon I. Kirkpatrick, 2019. "The Experience of Food Insecurity Among Immigrants: a Scoping Review," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 375-417, May.
    16. Zuhairi, A. & Nur Syahira Azlyn, A & Nur Suhaila, M. R & Mohd Zaini, M., 2020. "Land Use Classification And Mapping Using Landsat Imagery For Gis Database In Langkawi Island," Science Heritage Journal (GWS), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 4(2), pages 59-63:4, June.
    17. Alan J. Kearns, 2017. "Rebuilding Trust: Ireland’s CSR Plan in the Light of Caritas in Veritate," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(4), pages 845-857, December.
    18. Sylvia H. Paz & Loretta Jones & José L. Calderón & Ron D. Hays, 2017. "Readability and Comprehension of the Geriatric Depression Scale and PROMIS® Physical Function Items in Older African Americans and Latinos," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 10(1), pages 117-131, February.
    19. Jordan H. Rhodes & Thomas C. Buchmueller & Helen G. Levy & Sayeh S. Nikpay, 2020. "Heterogeneous Effects Of The Aca Medicaid Expansion On Hospital Financial Outcomes," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 38(1), pages 81-93, January.
    20. Lydia Zepeda, 2018. "Hiding hunger: food insecurity in middle America," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(1), pages 243-254, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0592-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.