Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Economics of Treatments for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

  • Review Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to review the economics of treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We systematically analysed the cost effectiveness of treatments for the different stages of NSCLC, with particular emphasis on more recently approved agents.

Numerous economic analyses in NSCLC have been conducted, with a variety of methods and in a number of countries. In patients with localized disease, adjuvant chemotherapy appears to have greater cost effectiveness than observation; however, there are few published data. In locally advanced disease, combined modalities (chemotherapy, surgery and/or radiotherapy) are probably cost effective, but high-quality economic analyses are lacking. In advanced NSCLC, third-generation chemotherapies used in the first-line setting can be administered with acceptable incremental cost effectiveness. In the second-line setting, new agents (docetaxel, pemetrexed and erlotinib) have acceptable cost effectiveness. The lack of cost-utility analyses for elderly patients and patients with a poor prognosis rules out firm conclusions.

This review suggests that most therapies for NSCLC are cost effective when the patient has a good performance status, with an incremental costeffectiveness ratio under $US50 000 per life-year gained in the majority of cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Table V

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bordeleau L. Pharmacoeconomics of systemic therapies for lung cancer. Treat Respir Med 2006; 5: 129–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Dooms CA, Lievens NY, Vansteenkiste JF. Cost-utility analysis of chemotherapy in symptomatic advanced non small cell lung cancer. Eur Respir J 2006; 27: 895–901

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Woodward RM, Brown ML, Stewart ST, et al. The value of medical interventions for lung cancer in the elderly: results from SEER-CMHSF. Cancer Published Online: 2007; 11: 2511–8

    Google Scholar 

  4. Alberts WM. Diagnosis and management of lung cancer executive summary: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. 2nd ed. Chest 2007; 132 [Suppl.]: 1S-19S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gridelli C, Langer C, Maione P, et al. Lung cancer in the elderly. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 1898–907

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chang S, Long SR, Kutikova L, et al. Estimating the cost of cancer: results on the basis of claims data analyses for cancer patients diagnosed with seven types of cancer during 1999 to 2000. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 3524–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chouaid C, Molinier L, Combescure C, et al. Economics of the clinical management of lung cancer in France: an analysis using a Markov model. Br J Cancer 2004; 90: 397–402

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Du W, Reeves JH, Gadgeel S, et al. Cost-effectiveness and lung cancer clinical trials. Cancer 2003; 98: 1491–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot JM, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to lung cancer in Canada and their costs. Br J Cancer 1995; 72: 1270–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Overview of economic analysis of Le Chevalier vinorelbine study. Oncology 1998; 12: 14–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Koopmanschap MA, Van Roijen L, Bonneux L, et al. A detailed description of the future costs of cancer. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A: 60–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Molinier L, Combescure C, Chouaïd C, et al. Cost of lung cancer: a methodological review. Pharmacoeconomics 2006; 24(7): 651–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wolstenholme JL, Whynes DK. The hospital costs of treating lung cancer in the United Kingdom. Br J Cancer 1999; 80: 215–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Braud AC, Lévy-Piedbois C, Piedbois P, et al. Direct treatment costs for patients with lung cancer from first recurrence to death in France. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21(9): 671–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kutikova L, Bowman L, Chang S, et al. The economic burden of lung cancer and the associated costs of treatment failure in the United States. Lung Cancer 2005; 50: 143–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fleming I, Monaghan P, Gavin A, et al. Factors influencing hospital costs of lung cancer patients in Northern Ireland. Eur J Health Econ 2008; 9 (1): 79–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Lung cancer: the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. National cost-impact report. London: NICE, 2005 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/cg024costings.pdf [Accessed 2007 Dec 28]

  18. Ng R, Hasan B, Mittmann N, et al. Economic analysis of NCIC CTG JBR.10: a randomized trial of adjuvant vinorelbine plus cisplatin compared with observation in early stage non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 2256–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Barbera L, Walker H, Foroudi F, et al. Estimating the benefit and cost of radiotherapy for lung cancer. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2004; 20: 545–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Robinson LA, Ruckdeschel JC, Wagner H, et al. Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer-stage IIIA: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. 2nd ed. Chest 2007; 132: 243S-65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jett JR, Schild SE, Keith RL, et al. Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer, stage IIIB: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. 2nd ed. Chest 2007; 132: 266S-76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot JM, et al. Cost of combined modality interventions for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 3038–48

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Vergnenegre A, Combescure C, Fournel P, et al. GFPC (Groupe Français de Pneumo-Cancisérologie). Cost-minimization analysis of a phase III trial comparing concurrent versus sequential radiochemotherapy for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (GFPC-GLOT 95–01). Ann Oncol 2006; 17: 1269–74

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Lievens Y, Kesteloot K, Bogaert W. CHART in lung cancer: economic evaluation and incentives for implementation. Radiother Oncol 2005; 75: 171–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Saunders M, Dische S, Barrett A, et al. Continuous, hyperfractionated, accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) versus conventional radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: mature data from the randomised multicentre trial. CHART Steering committee. Radiother Oncol 1999; 52: 137–48

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kramer GW, Wanders SL, Noordijk EM, et al. Results of the Dutch National study of the palliative effect of irradiation using two different treatment schemes for non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 2962–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. van den Hout WB, Kramer W, Noordijk ED, et al. Cost-utility analysis of short- versus long-course palliative radiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Nat Cancer Inst 2006; 24: 1786–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Earle CC, Evans WK. A comparison of the costs of paclitaxel and best supportive care in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Cancer Prev Control 1997; 1: 282–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Spiro SG, Rudd RM, Souhami RL, et al. Chemotherapy versus supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: improved survival without detriment to quality of life. Thorax 2004; 10: 828–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Maslove L, Gower N, Spiro S, et al. Estimation of the additional costs of chemotherapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Thorax 2005; 60: 564–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Billingham LJ, Bathers S, Burton A, et al. Patterns, costs and cost-effectiveness of care in a trial of chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2002; 37: 219–25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Lees M, Aristides M, Maniadakis N, et al. Economic evaluation of gemcitabin alone and combination with cisplatin in the treatment of nonsmall cell lung cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 (5): 325–37

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Jaakkimainen L, Goodwin PJ, Pater J, et al. Counting the costs of chemotherapy in a National Cancer Institute of Canada randomized trial in nonsmall-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1301–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kennedy W, Reinharz D, Tessier G, et al. Cost utility of chemotherapy and best supportive care in non-small cell lung cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 1995; 8 (4): 316–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Clegg A, Scott DA, Sidhu M, et al. A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and costeffectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabin and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer. Health Technol Assess 2001; 5: 1–195

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sacristan JA, Kennedy-Martin T, Rosell R, et al. Economic evaluation in a randomized phase III clinical trial comparing gemcitabin/cisplatin and etoposide/cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2000; 28: 97–107

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Neymark N, Lianes P, Smit EF, et al. Economic evaluation of three two-drug chemotherapy regimens in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23 (11): 1155–66

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Pimentel FL, Bhalla S, Laranjeira L, et al. Cost-minimization analysis for Portugal of five doublet chemotherapy regimens from two phase III trials in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2006; 52: 365–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Novello S, Kielhorn A, Stynes G, et al. Italian Lung Cancer Project Investigators. Cost-minimisation analysis comparing gemcitabin/cisplatin, paclitaxel/carboplatin and vinorelbine/cisplatin in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer in Italy. Lung Cancer 2005; 48: 379–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Rubio-Terrés C, Tisaire JL, Kobina S, et al. Cost-minimisation analysis of three regimens of chemotherapie (docetaxel-cisplatin, paclitaxel-cisplatin, paclitaxel-carboplatin) for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2002; 35: 81–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Ramsey SD, Moinpour CM, Lovato LC, et al. Economic analysis of vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94: 291–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Comella P, Frasci R, Panza N, et al. Randomized trial comparing cisplatin, gemcitabin, and vinorelbine with either cisplatin and gemcitabin or cisplatin and vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: interim analysis of a phase III trial of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group. Clin Lung Cancer 2000; 1: 202–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Schiller J, Tilden D, Aristides M, et al. Retrospective cost analysis of gemcitabin in combination with cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer compared to other combination therapies in Europe. Lung Cancer 2004; 43: 101–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Tennvall GR, Fernberg JO. Economic evaluation of gemcitabin single agent therapy compared with standard treatment in stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer. Med Oncol 1998; 15 (2): 129–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Scagliotti GV, De Marinis F, Rinaldi M, et al. Italian Lung Cancer Project. Phase III randomized trial comparing three platinum-based doublets in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 4285–91

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Annemans L, Giaccone G, Vergnenegre A. The cost effectiveness of paclitaxel (taxol) + cisplatin is similar to that of teniposide + cisplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a multicountry analysis. Anticancer Drugs 1999; 10: 605–15

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Earle CC, Evan WK. Cost effectiveness of paclitaxel plus cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer 1999; 80: 815–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Smith TJ, Hillner BE, Neighbors DM, et al. Economic evaluation of a randomised clinical trial comparing vinorelbine, vinorelbine plus cisplatin, and vindesine plus cisplatin for non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2166–73

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Maniadakis N, Fragoulakis V, Pallis A, et al. Economic evaluation of docetaxel/gemcitabin versus docetaxel as frontline treatment of patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in Greece. Lung Cancer 2007; 58: 275–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Horn L, Visbal A, Leighl NB. Docetaxel in non-small cell lung cancer: impact on quality of life and pharmacoeconomics. Drugs Aging 2007; 24: 411–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Le Lay K, Myon E, Hill S, et al. Comparative cost-minimisation of oral and intravenous chemotherapy for first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer in the UK NHS system. Eur J Health Econ 2007; 8: 145–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Leighl NB, Shepherd FA, Kwong R, et al. Economic analysis of the TAX 317 trial: docetaxel versus best supportive care as second-line therapy of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 1344–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Holmes J, Dunlop D, Hemmett L, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of docetaxel in the second-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22 (9): 581–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Bushill-Matthews L, Jackson D, Aristides M, et al. Reducing health care burden for the treatment of toxicity associated with pemetrexed or docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer who previously received chemotherapy: application to the UK setting. Eur J Cancer Suppl 2003; 1: 231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Pavlakis N, Mitchell PL, Stynes G. Cost-effectiveness of permetrexed for previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2005 May 13–17; Orlando (FL)

  56. Chouaid C, Monnet I, Robinet G, et al. Economic impact of gefitinib for refractory non-small-cell lung cancer: a Markov model-based analysis. Curr Med Res Opin 2007; 23: 1509–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Côté I, Leighl NB, Gyldmark M, et al. Pharmacoeconomic analyses of erlotinib compared with best supportive care (BSC) for the treatment of relapsed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the Canadian public health care perspective [abstract]. Value Health 2006; 6: A279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Lewis G, Morlotti L, Creeden J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of erlotinib compared with docetaxel for the treatment of relapsed non small cell lung cancer (SNCL) in UK [abstract]. Value Health 2006; 6: A203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Carlson JJ, Reyes C, Oestreicher N, et al. Comparative clinical and economic outcomes of treatment for refractory non small cell lung cancers. Lung cancer 2008; 61: 405–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. C. Chouaid has received consultant’s fees (of less than $US10 000) from Roche Pharmaceuticals, Amgen and Lilly; and A. Vergnenegre has received consultant’s fees (of less than $US10 000) from Roche Pharmaceuticals and Lilly. K. Atsou and G. Hejblum have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the contents of this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INSERM, U707, Paris, France

    Christos Chouaid, Kukovi Atsou & Gilles Hejblum

  2. Pierre and Marie Curie University, Paris, France

    Christos Chouaid

  3. Chest Department, AP-HP, Saint Antoine Hospital, Paris, France

    Christos Chouaid

  4. Public Health Department, AP-HP, Saint Antoine Hospital, Paris, France

    Gilles Hejblum

  5. Evaluation Unit, Chest Department, Cluzeau Hospital, Limoges, France

    Alain Vergnenegre

Authors
  1. Christos Chouaid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kukovi Atsou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gilles Hejblum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alain Vergnenegre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christos Chouaid.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chouaid, C., Atsou, K., Hejblum, G. et al. Economics of Treatments for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 27, 113–125 (2009). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200927020-00003

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200927020-00003

Keywords

Search

Navigation