Real-world resource use and costs of adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer

Publication date

2015

Authors

van Gils, Carla H.ORCID 0000-0003-0817-7567
de Groot, S
Tan, S S
Redekop, W K
Koopman, MiriamORCID 0000-0003-1550-1978ISNI 0000000077221902
Punt, C J A
Uyl-de Groot, C A

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

Collections

Open Access logo

License

taverne

Abstract

Since the generalisability of trial-based economic evaluations may be limited, there is an increasing focus on real-world cost-effectiveness. Real-world studies involve evaluating the effects and costs of treatments in daily clinical practice. This study reports on the real-world resource use and costs of adjuvant treatments of stage III colon cancer in a population-based observational study. Analyses were based on a detailed retrospective medical chart review which was conducted for 206 patients with colon cancer treated in 2005 and 2006 in the Netherlands. Mean total costs per patient were €9681 for 5-FU/LV, €9736 for capecitabine, €32,793 for FOLFOX and €18,361 for CAPOX. Drug costs and the costs related to hospitalisations for chemotherapy administration were the main cost drivers. We identified a potential for substantial cost-savings when the 48 h administration of 5FU/LV in the FOLFOX regimen were to take place in an outpatient setting or be replaced by oral capecitabine as in the CAPOX regimen. This analysis based on detailed real-life data clearly indicates that clinical choices made in oncology based on efficacy of therapy have economic consequences. Considering today's reality of finite healthcare resources, these economic consequences deserve a formal role in clinical decision making, for instance in guideline development.

Keywords

colon cancer, chemotherapy, costs, real-world, Taverne

Citation

van Gils, C W M, de Groot, S, Tan, S S, Redekop, W K, Koopman, M, Punt, C J A & Uyl-de Groot, C A 2015, 'Real-world resource use and costs of adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer', European Journal of Cancer Care, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 321-332. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12154