Key result
Adding netupitant to palonosetron and dexamethasone proves economically superior for CINV at ~€1016 per response.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to assess the cost-efficacy of netupitant plus palonosetron for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in highly and moderately emetogenic cancer chemotherapy.
Is netupitant plus palonosetron cost-effective compared to palonosetron alone for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy?
Is netupitant plus palonosetron cost-effective compared to palonosetron alone for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy?
The combination of netupitant plus palonosetron with dexamethasone is a cost-effective strategy for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting compared to palonosetron with dexamethasone.
May support netupitant-palonosetron for cost-effective CINV prevention; leaves open prospective validation in routine practice.
Introduction: The analysis was conducted to assess a cost-efficacy analysis of new antiemetic drugs (netupitant plus palonosetron (NEPA)) for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy for cancer treatment.Areas covered:The present evaluation was restricted to pivotal phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of NEPA versus (vs.) palonosetron for the prophylaxis of CINV. We calculated the pharmacological costs necessary to get the benefit in complete response (CR), for each trial. Our analysis evaluated 2 RCTs, including 1720 patients. Referring to both highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, NEPA plus DEX was economic superior to palonosetron (PALO) plus DEX, with 13 312 € and 7885 € gain in medical costs every 100 patients treated, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) (€/CR) in highly emetogenic risk were 1.24 and 13.23 for the NEPA and PALO group, respectively and 1.49 and 15.20 for the same groups in moderately emetogenic risk. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the groups was 1016.18 €/CR and 1024.03 €/CR in highly and moderately emetogenic risk, respectively.Expert opinion:The combination of NEPA plus DEX is cost-effective for preventing CINV in highly and moderately (AC-based) emetogenic cancer treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giuliani et al. (2019) studied Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) (n=1,720). Netupitant plus palonosetron (NEPA) plus dexamethasone vs. Palonosetron plus dexamethasone was evaluated on Cost-effectiveness ratio (€/CR) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (ICER 1016.18 €/CR (highly emetogenic) and 1024.03 €/CR (moderately emetogenic)). Netupitant plus palonosetron with dexamethasone was economically superior to palonosetron with dexamethasone for preventing CINV, with an ICER of 1016.18 €/CR in highly emetogenic risk.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: