Economic Analysis of Panitumumab Compared With Cetuximab in Patients With Wild-type KRAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer That Progressed After Standard Chemotherapy
In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panit...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical therapeutics Jg. 38; H. 6; S. 1376 - 1391 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
United States
Elsevier Inc
01.06.2016
Elsevier Limited |
| Schlagworte: | |
| ISSN: | 0149-2918, 1879-114X, 1879-114X |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Abstract | In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population.
A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti–epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT.
The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab.
These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population.
A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti-epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT.
The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab.
These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377. In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population.PURPOSEIn this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population.A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti-epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT.METHODSA decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti-epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT.The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab.FINDINGSThe cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab.These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377.IMPLICATIONSThese economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377. Purpose In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population. Methods A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti-epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT. Findings The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab. Implications These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377. Purpose In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-typeKRAS(exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients WithKRASWild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population. Methods A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-typeKRAS(exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti-epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT. Findings The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab. Implications These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-typeKRAS(exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377. Abstract Purpose In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population. Methods A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti–epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT. Findings The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab. Implications These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377. |
| Author | Schwartzberg, Lee S. Graham, Christopher N. Knox, Hediyyih N. Hjelmgren, Jonas Barber, Beth Fakih, Marwan G. Hechmati, Guy Maglinte, Gregory A. Price, Timothy J. |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Christopher N. surname: Graham fullname: Graham, Christopher N. email: cgraham@rti.org organization: RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina – sequence: 2 givenname: Gregory A. surname: Maglinte fullname: Maglinte, Gregory A. organization: Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, California – sequence: 3 givenname: Lee S. surname: Schwartzberg fullname: Schwartzberg, Lee S. organization: West Clinic, Memphis, Tennessee – sequence: 4 givenname: Timothy J. surname: Price fullname: Price, Timothy J. organization: The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, South Australia, Australia – sequence: 5 givenname: Hediyyih N. surname: Knox fullname: Knox, Hediyyih N. email: hknox@rti.org organization: RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina – sequence: 6 givenname: Guy surname: Hechmati fullname: Hechmati, Guy organization: Amgen GmbH, Zug, Switzerland – sequence: 7 givenname: Jonas surname: Hjelmgren fullname: Hjelmgren, Jonas organization: Amgen GmbH, Zug, Switzerland – sequence: 8 givenname: Beth surname: Barber fullname: Barber, Beth organization: Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, California – sequence: 9 givenname: Marwan G. surname: Fakih fullname: Fakih, Marwan G. organization: City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27085587$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNqNkl9v0zAUxSM0xLrBVwBLvPCSYidOYj_AVEXjjxhiokPjzXLtG-qS2MV2EP04fFMcOoZUCbEnS9e_e2Sfc06yI-ssZNkTgucEk_r5Zq56Y-MavJwXaTDH5RwX5b1sRljDc0Lo56NshgnlecEJO85OQthgjEteFQ-y46LBrKpYM8t-nitn3WAUWljZ74IJyHXoUloTx2Ec5Aq1bthKDxpdm7hGLcTxh5nmxiYsGrAx7K-uTa_zuNsCevdxsUTvIcoQE6GSRO88qCh71EqrwKOrtYzo0rsvHkJI2osupukySqul16hdw-B-_267e5jd72Qf4NHNeZp9enV-1b7JLz68ftsuLnJV8SLmXdkQaMqulpRTpnVTKUpqqhRThZa0XNWqwZoqDZVihHacEM2U5qB1QQsN5Wn2bK-79e7bCCGKwQQFfS8tuDEIwjBrCKuK-v9owxnnNJmd0KcH6MaNPlk9CTaYlwxznKjHN9S4GkCLrU8W-534k1MCmj2gvAvBQ3eLECymRoiNuG2EmBohcClSI9Lmi4NNZaZUnI1emv4O-4v9PiTvvxvwIqgUugJtpkiFduYOGi8PNCbOKNl_hR2Ev46IUAgsllNvp9qSukwqeDL87N8Cd3rCL451A_c |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1007_s40273_020_00908_4 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12885_021_08725_4 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0204496 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_currproblcancer_2018_05_001 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40291_021_00560_4 crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph19159196 crossref_primary_10_1007_s12032_018_1176_6 crossref_primary_10_3389_fonc_2021_594200 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.7116 10.3310/hta17140 10.1093/annonc/mdp535 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.113 10.1056/NEJMoa1305275 10.1056/NEJMoa033025 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.7812 10.1056/NEJMoa0805019 10.1200/JCO.2005.07.113 10.3111/13696998.2011.650774 10.1056/NEJMoa032691 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70118-4 10.1056/NEJMoa0804385 10.3111/13696998.2013.852097 10.1056/NEJMoa071834 10.1097/00005650-200503000-00003 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.1193 10.1002/hec.584 10.1177/1078155209360853 10.1200/JOP.2011.000469 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.1620 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | 2016 The Authors The Authors Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Copyright Elsevier Limited Jun 01, 2016 |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: 2016 The Authors – notice: The Authors – notice: Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. – notice: Copyright Elsevier Limited Jun 01, 2016 |
| DBID | 6I. AAFTH AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 7RV 7X7 7XB 88C 88E 8AO 8FI 8FJ 8FK 8G5 ABUWG AFKRA AZQEC BENPR CCPQU DWQXO FYUFA GHDGH GNUQQ GUQSH K9. KB0 M0S M0T M1P M2O M7N MBDVC NAPCQ PHGZM PHGZT PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS Q9U 7X8 7U7 C1K |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023 |
| DatabaseName | ScienceDirect Open Access Titles Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Nursing & allied health premium. ProQuest_Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni) Medical Database (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Pharma Collection Hospital Premium Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) Research Library (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Central ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Central Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Central Student Research Library Prep (ProQuest) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition) Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition) Healthcare Administration Database PML(ProQuest Medical Library) ProQuest Research Library Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C) Research Library (Corporate) ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Premium ProQuest Databases ProQuest One Academic ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic (retired) ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central Basic MEDLINE - Academic Toxicology Abstracts Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) Research Library Prep ProQuest Central Student ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing Research Library (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Pharma Collection ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection Health Research Premium Collection Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Korea Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C) Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest Research Library ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni) ProQuest Central Basic ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Health Management ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Premium ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Health Management (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source (Alumni) ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic Toxicology Abstracts Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE MEDLINE - Academic Toxicology Abstracts Research Library Prep |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7RV name: Nursing & Allied Health Database url: https://search.proquest.com/nahs sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine Pharmacy, Therapeutics, & Pharmacology |
| EISSN | 1879-114X |
| EndPage | 1391 |
| ExternalDocumentID | 4316742291 27085587 10_1016_j_clinthera_2016_03_023 S0149291816301606 1_s2_0_S0149291816301606 |
| Genre | Clinical Trial, Phase III Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial Journal Article |
| GeographicLocations | United States--US |
| GeographicLocations_xml | – name: United States--US |
| GroupedDBID | --- --K --M .1- .FO .GJ .~1 0R~ 123 1B1 1P~ 1~. 1~5 29B 4.4 457 4G. 53G 5RE 5VS 6J9 6PF 7-5 71M 7RV 7X7 88E 8AO 8FI 8FJ 8G5 8P~ AABNK AAEDT AAEDW AAIKJ AAKOC AALRI AAOAW AAQFI AAQQT AAQXK AATTM AAWTL AAXKI AAXUO AAYWO ABBQC ABFNM ABFRF ABJNI ABMAC ABMZM ABUWG ABWVN ABXDB ABZDS ACDAQ ACIEU ACLOT ACPRK ACRLP ACRPL ACVFH ADBBV ADCNI ADEZE ADFRT ADMUD ADNMO ADVLN AEBSH AEFWE AEIPS AEKER AENEX AEUPX AEVXI AFFNX AFJKZ AFKRA AFPUW AFRAH AFRHN AFTJW AFXIZ AGHFR AGQPQ AGUBO AGYEJ AHMBA AIEXJ AIGII AIIUN AIKHN AITUG AJRQY AJUYK AKBMS AKRWK AKYEP ALCLG ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMRAJ ANKPU ANZVX APXCP AQUVI ASPBG AVWKF AXJTR AZFZN AZQEC BENPR BKEYQ BKOJK BLXMC BNPGV BPHCQ BVXVI CCPQU CS3 DU5 DWQXO EBS EFJIC EFKBS EFLBG EJD EMOBN EO8 EO9 EP2 EP3 EX3 F5P FDB FEDTE FGOYB FIRID FNPLU FYGXN FYUFA G-Q GBLVA GNUQQ GUQSH HMCUK HVGLF HZ~ H~9 IHE J1W KOM M0T M1P M2O M41 MO0 N9A NAPCQ O-L O9- OAUVE OD~ OGGZJ OO0 OZT P-8 P-9 PC. PHGZM PHGZT PJZUB PPXIY PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO Q38 R2- ROL RPZ SCC SDF SDG SEL SES SEW SPCBC SSH SSP SSZ SV3 T5K UHS UKHRP WH7 WOW XOL Z5R ZGI ZXP ~G- ~HD 0SF 3V. AACTN AAYOK AFCTW AFKWA AJOXV ALIPV AMFUW NCXOZ RIG 6I. AAFTH AAIAV AATCM ABLVK ABYKQ AJBFU LCYCR 9DU AAYXX AFFHD CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7XB 8FK K9. M7N MBDVC PKEHL PQEST PQUKI PRINS Q9U 7X8 PUEGO 7U7 C1K |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c592t-f371e73f6a4948dd75c4164cc8c2da43b6c70d4cde5c814f911d8cd9edd242de3 |
| IEDL.DBID | BENPR |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 10 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000379631000011&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 0149-2918 1879-114X |
| IngestDate | Tue Oct 07 09:35:45 EDT 2025 Sat Sep 27 18:14:59 EDT 2025 Tue Oct 07 06:36:56 EDT 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:36:54 EST 2025 Sat Nov 29 06:32:38 EST 2025 Tue Nov 18 22:45:24 EST 2025 Fri Feb 23 02:30:14 EST 2024 Tue Feb 25 19:59:20 EST 2025 Tue Oct 14 19:31:27 EDT 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 6 |
| Keywords | cost-effectiveness cetuximab cost-minimization colorectal cancer panitumumab subsequent-line |
| Language | English |
| License | This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license. Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c592t-f371e73f6a4948dd75c4164cc8c2da43b6c70d4cde5c814f911d8cd9edd242de3 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/1-s2.0-S0149291816301606 |
| PMID | 27085587 |
| PQID | 1870938090 |
| PQPubID | 1226358 |
| PageCount | 16 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_1808718526 proquest_miscellaneous_1798994395 proquest_journals_1870938090 pubmed_primary_27085587 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_clinthera_2016_03_023 crossref_citationtrail_10_1016_j_clinthera_2016_03_023 elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_clinthera_2016_03_023 elsevier_clinicalkeyesjournals_1_s2_0_S0149291816301606 elsevier_clinicalkey_doi_10_1016_j_clinthera_2016_03_023 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2016-06-01 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2016-06-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 06 year: 2016 text: 2016-06-01 day: 01 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States – name: Bridgewater |
| PublicationTitle | Clinical therapeutics |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Clin Ther |
| PublicationYear | 2016 |
| Publisher | Elsevier Inc Elsevier Limited |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Elsevier Inc – name: Elsevier Limited |
| References | Karapetis, Khambata-Ford, Jonker (bib10) 2008; 359 Lawrence, Maschio, Leahy (bib20) 2013; 16 Accessed July 14, 2014. Jonker, O’Callaghan, Karapetis (bib8) 2007; 357 (bib26) 1996 Accessed November 13, 2014. Shaw, Johnson, Coons (bib25) 2005; 43 Accessed February 28, 2014. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN practice guidelines in oncology: rectal cancer. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer price index—all urban consumers. Item: medical care. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Physician fee schedule search. Chastek, Harley, Kallich (bib33) 2012; 8 (bib18) 2010; 10 Price, Peeters, Kim (bib15) 2014; 15 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN practice guidelines in oncology: colon cancer. Accessed May 6, 2015. Shaib, Mahajan, El-Rayes (bib14) 2013; 4 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). ASCO value framework: fact sheet. Amgen Inc. Vectibix (panitumumab) full prescribing information. May 2014. Douillard, Oliner, Siena (bib13) 2013; 369 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Medicare average sales prices from the payment allowance limits for Medicare Part B drugs. 2014. Hansen, Chandiramani, Morse (bib38) 2011; 17 Van Cutsem, Peeters, Siena (bib11) 2007; 25 O’Neil, Allen, Spigel (bib34) 2007; 25 Colucci, Gebbia, Paoletti (bib5) 2005; 23 Van Cutsem, Köhne, Hitre (bib9) 2009; 360 Eli Lilly and Company. Erbitux (cetuximab) full prescribing information. August 2013. Amado, Wolf, Peeters (bib12) 2008; 26 Foley, Wang, Barber (bib32) 2010; 21 Accessed February 10, 2014. Briggs, O’Brien (bib16) 2001; 10 Accessed February 20, 2014. Accessed February 18, 2014. Burudpakdee, Zhao, Munakata (bib30) 2012; 15 George, Laplant, Walden (bib36) 2010; 8 Foley, Wang, Barber (bib37) 2010; 21 National Cancer Institute (NCI). Cancer stat fact sheets: cancer of the colon and rectum. Micromedex. Red Book Online. Accessed through Micromedex 2.0. Greenwood Village, CO: Thomson Reuters, 2014 HCUPNet. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Hurwitz, Fehrenbacher, Novotny (bib6) 2004; 350 Latimer N. NICE D.S.U. technical support document 14: undertaking survival analysis for economic evaluations alongside clinical trials—extrapolation with patient-level data. Tournigand, André, Achille (bib4) 2004; 22 Sobrero, Maurel, Fehrenbacher (bib35) 2008; 26 Hoyle, Crathorne, Peters (bib19) 2013; 17 Accessed July 3, 2014. Cunningham, Humblet, Siena (bib7) 2004; 351 Foley (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib32) 2010; 21 Briggs (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib16) 2001; 10 Price (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib15) 2014; 15 Karapetis (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib10) 2008; 359 Sobrero (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib35) 2008; 26 Van Cutsem (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib11) 2007; 25 Foley (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib37) 2010; 21 Lawrence (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib20) 2013; 16 (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib26) 1996 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib29 Jonker (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib8) 2007; 357 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib28 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib27 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib22 Chastek (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib33) 2012; 8 O’Neil (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib34) 2007; 25 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib21 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib24 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib23 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib2 Douillard (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib13) 2013; 369 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib1 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib31 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib3 Van Cutsem (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib9) 2009; 360 Cunningham (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib7) 2004; 351 Colucci (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib5) 2005; 23 Hurwitz (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib6) 2004; 350 George (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib36) 2010; 8 (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib18) 2010; 10 Burudpakdee (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib30) 2012; 15 Tournigand (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib4) 2004; 22 Shaib (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib14) 2013; 4 Amado (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib12) 2008; 26 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib17 Shaw (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib25) 2005; 43 Hoyle (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib19) 2013; 17 Hansen (10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib38) 2011; 17 |
| References_xml | – volume: 369 start-page: 1023 year: 2013 end-page: 1034 ident: bib13 article-title: Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and publication-title: N Engl J Med – volume: 43 start-page: 203 year: 2005 end-page: 220 ident: bib25 article-title: US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model publication-title: Med Care – reference: HCUPNet. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. – volume: 22 start-page: 229 year: 2004 end-page: 237 ident: bib4 article-title: FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study publication-title: J Clin Oncol – volume: 15 start-page: 371 year: 2012 end-page: 377 ident: bib30 article-title: Economic burden of toxicities associated with metastatic colorectal cancer treatment regimens containing monoclonal antibodies publication-title: J Med Econ – reference: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Physician fee schedule search. – reference: . Accessed July 3, 2014. – volume: 359 start-page: 1757 year: 2008 end-page: 1765 ident: bib10 article-title: K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med – year: 1996 ident: bib26 publication-title: Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine: Report of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine – reference: . Accessed July 14, 2014. – volume: 350 start-page: 2335 year: 2004 end-page: 2342 ident: bib6 article-title: Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med – volume: 10 start-page: 1 year: 2010 end-page: 49 ident: bib18 article-title: testing for anti-EGFR therapy in advanced colorectal cancer: an evidence-based and economic analysis publication-title: Ont Health Technol Assess Ser – reference: National Cancer Institute (NCI). Cancer stat fact sheets: cancer of the colon and rectum. – reference: Eli Lilly and Company. Erbitux (cetuximab) full prescribing information. August 2013. – volume: 15 start-page: 569 year: 2014 end-page: 579 ident: bib15 article-title: Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type publication-title: Lancet Oncol – reference: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). ASCO value framework: fact sheet. – volume: 26 start-page: 1626 year: 2008 end-page: 1634 ident: bib12 article-title: Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: J Clin Oncol – reference: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Medicare average sales prices from the payment allowance limits for Medicare Part B drugs. 2014. – volume: 21 start-page: 1455 year: 2010 end-page: 1461 ident: bib37 article-title: Clinical and economic impact of infusion reactions in patients with colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab publication-title: Ann Oncol – reference: . Accessed May 6, 2015. – volume: 4 start-page: 308 year: 2013 end-page: 318 ident: bib14 article-title: Markers of resistance to anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer publication-title: J Gastrointest Oncol – volume: 25 start-page: 1658 year: 2007 end-page: 1664 ident: bib11 article-title: Open-label phase III trial of panitumumab plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: J Clin Oncol – volume: 26 start-page: 2311 year: 2008 end-page: 2319 ident: bib35 article-title: EPIC: phase III trial of cetuximab plus irinotecan after fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin failure in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: J Clin Oncol – reference: . Accessed February 28, 2014. – volume: 351 start-page: 337 year: 2004 end-page: 345 ident: bib7 article-title: Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med – reference: . Accessed November 13, 2014. – volume: 17 start-page: 1 year: 2013 end-page: 237 ident: bib19 article-title: The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cetuximab (mono- or combination chemotherapy), bevacizumab (combination with non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy) and panitumumab (monotherapy) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer after first-line chemotherapy (review of technology appraisal No.150 and part review of technology appraisal No. 118): a systematic review and economic model publication-title: Health Technol Assess – reference: . Accessed February 18, 2014. – volume: 21 start-page: 1455 year: 2010 end-page: 1461 ident: bib32 article-title: Clinical and economic impact of infusion reactions in patients with colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab publication-title: Ann Oncol – volume: 357 start-page: 2040 year: 2007 end-page: 2048 ident: bib8 article-title: Cetuximab for the treatment of colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med – volume: 10 start-page: 179 year: 2001 end-page: 184 ident: bib16 article-title: The death of cost-minimization analysis? publication-title: Health Econ – volume: 17 start-page: 125 year: 2011 end-page: 130 ident: bib38 article-title: Incidence and predictors of cetuximab hypersensitivity reactions in a North Carolina academic medical center publication-title: J Oncol Pharm Pract – volume: 8 start-page: 75s year: 2012 end-page: 80s ident: bib33 article-title: Health care costs for patients with cancer at end of life publication-title: J Oncol Pract – reference: Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer price index—all urban consumers. Item: medical care. – reference: Amgen Inc. Vectibix (panitumumab) full prescribing information. May 2014. – reference: . Accessed February 10, 2014. – volume: 23 start-page: 4866 year: 2005 end-page: 4875 ident: bib5 article-title: Gruppo Oncologico Dell’Italia Meridionale Phase III randomized trial of FOLFIRI versus FOLFOX4 in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: a multicenter study of the Gruppo Oncologico Dell’Italia Meridionale publication-title: J Clin Oncol – reference: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN practice guidelines in oncology: rectal cancer. – reference: Latimer N. NICE D.S.U. technical support document 14: undertaking survival analysis for economic evaluations alongside clinical trials—extrapolation with patient-level data. – volume: 8 start-page: 72 year: 2010 end-page: 77 ident: bib36 article-title: Managing cetuximab hypersensitivity-infusion reactions: incidence, risk factors, prevention, and retreatment publication-title: J Support Oncol – volume: 360 start-page: 1408 year: 2009 end-page: 1417 ident: bib9 article-title: Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med – volume: 16 start-page: 1387 year: 2013 end-page: 1398 ident: bib20 article-title: Economic analysis of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of publication-title: J Med Econ – volume: 25 start-page: 3644 year: 2007 end-page: 3648 ident: bib34 article-title: High incidence of cetuximab-related infusion reactions in Tennessee and North Carolina and the association with atopic history publication-title: J Clin Oncol – reference: Micromedex. Red Book Online. Accessed through Micromedex 2.0. Greenwood Village, CO: Thomson Reuters, 2014; – reference: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN practice guidelines in oncology: colon cancer. – reference: . Accessed February 20, 2014. – volume: 26 start-page: 1626 year: 2008 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib12 article-title: Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: J Clin Oncol doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.7116 – volume: 8 start-page: 72 year: 2010 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib36 article-title: Managing cetuximab hypersensitivity-infusion reactions: incidence, risk factors, prevention, and retreatment publication-title: J Support Oncol – volume: 17 start-page: 1 year: 2013 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib19 publication-title: Health Technol Assess doi: 10.3310/hta17140 – volume: 21 start-page: 1455 year: 2010 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib32 article-title: Clinical and economic impact of infusion reactions in patients with colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab publication-title: Ann Oncol doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp535 – volume: 22 start-page: 229 year: 2004 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib4 article-title: FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study publication-title: J Clin Oncol doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.113 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib17 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib31 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib2 – volume: 369 start-page: 1023 year: 2013 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib13 article-title: Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1305275 – volume: 351 start-page: 337 year: 2004 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib7 article-title: Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa033025 – volume: 25 start-page: 3644 year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib34 article-title: High incidence of cetuximab-related infusion reactions in Tennessee and North Carolina and the association with atopic history publication-title: J Clin Oncol doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.7812 – volume: 360 start-page: 1408 year: 2009 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib9 article-title: Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805019 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib22 – volume: 21 start-page: 1455 year: 2010 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib37 article-title: Clinical and economic impact of infusion reactions in patients with colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab publication-title: Ann Oncol doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp535 – volume: 23 start-page: 4866 year: 2005 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib5 article-title: Gruppo Oncologico Dell’Italia Meridionale Phase III randomized trial of FOLFIRI versus FOLFOX4 in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: a multicenter study of the Gruppo Oncologico Dell’Italia Meridionale publication-title: J Clin Oncol doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.07.113 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib24 – volume: 15 start-page: 371 year: 2012 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib30 article-title: Economic burden of toxicities associated with metastatic colorectal cancer treatment regimens containing monoclonal antibodies publication-title: J Med Econ doi: 10.3111/13696998.2011.650774 – volume: 350 start-page: 2335 year: 2004 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib6 article-title: Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032691 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib28 – volume: 15 start-page: 569 year: 2014 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib15 article-title: Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study publication-title: Lancet Oncol doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70118-4 – volume: 359 start-page: 1757 year: 2008 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib10 article-title: K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0804385 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib3 – volume: 16 start-page: 1387 year: 2013 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib20 article-title: Economic analysis of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) publication-title: J Med Econ doi: 10.3111/13696998.2013.852097 – volume: 357 start-page: 2040 year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib8 article-title: Cetuximab for the treatment of colorectal cancer publication-title: N Engl J Med doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa071834 – volume: 43 start-page: 203 year: 2005 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib25 article-title: US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model publication-title: Med Care doi: 10.1097/00005650-200503000-00003 – volume: 26 start-page: 2311 year: 2008 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib35 article-title: EPIC: phase III trial of cetuximab plus irinotecan after fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin failure in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: J Clin Oncol doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.1193 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib1 – volume: 10 start-page: 179 year: 2001 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib16 article-title: The death of cost-minimization analysis? publication-title: Health Econ doi: 10.1002/hec.584 – volume: 17 start-page: 125 year: 2011 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib38 article-title: Incidence and predictors of cetuximab hypersensitivity reactions in a North Carolina academic medical center publication-title: J Oncol Pharm Pract doi: 10.1177/1078155209360853 – volume: 8 start-page: 75s year: 2012 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib33 article-title: Health care costs for patients with cancer at end of life publication-title: J Oncol Pract doi: 10.1200/JOP.2011.000469 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib21 – volume: 4 start-page: 308 year: 2013 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib14 article-title: Markers of resistance to anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer publication-title: J Gastrointest Oncol – year: 1996 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib26 – volume: 10 start-page: 1 year: 2010 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib18 article-title: KRAS testing for anti-EGFR therapy in advanced colorectal cancer: an evidence-based and economic analysis publication-title: Ont Health Technol Assess Ser – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib29 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib23 – volume: 25 start-page: 1658 year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib11 article-title: Open-label phase III trial of panitumumab plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer publication-title: J Clin Oncol doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.1620 – ident: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023_bib27 |
| SSID | ssj0003952 |
| Score | 2.219243 |
| Snippet | In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type... Abstract Purpose In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients... Purpose In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed crossref elsevier |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 1376 |
| SubjectTerms | Adult Antibodies, Monoclonal - economics Antibodies, Monoclonal - therapeutic use Antineoplastic Agents - economics Antineoplastic Agents - therapeutic use Cancer therapies cetuximab Cetuximab - economics Cetuximab - therapeutic use Chemotherapy Clinical trials Colorectal cancer Colorectal Neoplasms - drug therapy Colorectal Neoplasms - genetics Colorectal Neoplasms - pathology Cost analysis Cost-Benefit Analysis cost-effectiveness cost-minimization Disease-Free Survival Epidermal growth factor Exons Humans Internal Medicine Medical Education Metastasis Mutation Neoplasm Metastasis Panitumumab Patients Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras) - genetics Quality of life Quality-Adjusted Life Years subsequent-line |
| Title | Economic Analysis of Panitumumab Compared With Cetuximab in Patients With Wild-type KRAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer That Progressed After Standard Chemotherapy |
| URI | https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/1-s2.0-S0149291816301606 https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S0149291816301606 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.023 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27085587 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1870938090 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1798994395 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1808718526 |
| Volume | 38 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000379631000011&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVESC databaseName: Elsevier SD Freedom Collection Journals 2021 customDbUrl: eissn: 1879-114X dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0003952 issn: 0149-2918 databaseCode: AIEXJ dateStart: 20130901 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.sciencedirect.com providerName: Elsevier – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Healthcare Administration Database customDbUrl: eissn: 1879-114X dateEnd: 20251009 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0003952 issn: 0149-2918 databaseCode: M0T dateStart: 20020101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/healthmanagement providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Nursing & Allied Health Database customDbUrl: eissn: 1879-114X dateEnd: 20251009 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0003952 issn: 0149-2918 databaseCode: 7RV dateStart: 20020101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/nahs providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: ProQuest Central customDbUrl: eissn: 1879-114X dateEnd: 20251009 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0003952 issn: 0149-2918 databaseCode: BENPR dateStart: 20020101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.proquest.com/central providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: ProQuest Health & Medical Collection customDbUrl: eissn: 1879-114X dateEnd: 20251009 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0003952 issn: 0149-2918 databaseCode: 7X7 dateStart: 20020101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/healthcomplete providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: ProQuest Research Library customDbUrl: eissn: 1879-114X dateEnd: 20251009 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0003952 issn: 0149-2918 databaseCode: M2O dateStart: 20020101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/pqrl providerName: ProQuest |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3db9MwELdYh9Be-BhfhTEZCe1pEfm2zQsq1SYk1BJ1BfpmObYjirZ2NCmifw7_KXeJkwqJbUi8WErjq5301_Odffc7Ql6BjyCMAMtNpz734sDkXh6C46pVivTpvjFK1cUm2HjMZzORuQ230oVVtjqxVtRmqXGP_HUAwBIR94X_9vK7h1Wj8HTVldDYIbvIVBb3yO67k3E26XRxJOqaO-gHeKEI-B8RXph7WGc5YYRXWnOdhtFV69NV9me9Dp3e-98nuE_uOguUDhrIPCC37GKf3Bm5M_Z9cpQ1bNabYzrdJmeVx_SIZlue681D8qtNaqYtswldFjRDPo31xfpC5XToAtzpl3n1lQ5ttf45x8_nC-hW87mWzS3QTcbD3WD6YTI4oyNbKcx0gq8ewmColGHGQwToCialKpphWBnSnhs6wCrn9MxtiVBkQHBZZZtH5NPpyXT43nMVHzydiLDyiogFlkVFqpC1xhiWaDAYY625Do2KozzVAJ9YG5toHsQFaGqsviSsMWBqGBs9Jr3FcmGfEqpYaiKTi1ylJjZKcyV0GuZW2YQViQj6JG1_Z6kdHTpW5TiXbdzbN9kBRCJApB9JAEif-J3gZcMIcrMIb4Ek24RXUNESVq2bRdnfRG3pVE0pA1mG0q-j9ARCHAxsZA1M--RNJ-msqcZK-rdhD1oMy-1IHYD75GV3G9QRnjGphV2uoQ8T4MGDlZtc04f74KbzJIQ5Pmn-S92bDBkGTnL27PoJPCd7ONsmZu-A9KrV2r4gt_WPal6uDskOm3zGdsbqlh86vQBXI3-KbfjxNyS6bxM |
| linkProvider | ProQuest |
| linkToHtml | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V1LbxMxELZKQcCFR3kFChgJeuqKfdtGQihaqFqliVY0qL0Zr-0VQTQp2Q2Qn8Mf4Dcys68IibZceuCatdcjZ172fvMNIc_hjCCMgMxNxy53Qs9kTubDwVWrGOnTXWOUqppNsNGIHx2JdI38amthEFbZ-sTKUZuZxjvylx4olgi4K9w3J18d7BqFX1fbFhq1Wgzs8jsc2YrXe2_h_33h-zvvxsmu03QVcHQk_NLJA-ZZFuSxQmYUY1ikISkJtebaNyoMsliDiKE2NtLcC3PwBtjhR1hjIJwZG8B7L5HLyKuHEMKhO-48fyCqDj946nB84fE_8GRY6VjVVCGeLK6YVf3gtGh4WrZbRb2dm__bft0iN5r8mvZrg7hN1ux0g1wdNgiCDbKV1lzdy206XpWeFdt0i6YrFu_lHfKzLdmmLW8LneU0RbaQxfHiWGU0aeD79HBSfqKJLRc_Jvj7ZArDKrbaon4Entc4eNdNB-_7B3RoS4V1XPDqBBbDkAMSJ2h-cxBKlTRF0BySuhvaxx7u9KC58KHI79DUzC3vkg8XspP3yPp0NrUPCFUsNoHJRKZiExqluRI69jOrbMTySHg9Erd6JXVD9o49R77IFtX3WXYKKVEhpRtIUMgecbuJJzXfyflTeKu4si3nhQAkISafP5X9baotGkdaSE8WvnQrDKJAk4LjA3Iixj3yqpvZ5Ip1Dvhvy262NiNXK3UG0yPPusfgbPELmpra2QLGMMGFgBw-OmMMdzlDSgKQ8X5tu91O-gxhoZw9PFuAp-Ta7ni4L_f3RoNH5DpKXqMTN8l6OV_Yx-SK_lZOivmTyv9Q8vGiDfg3gzbIHA |
| linkToPdf | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V1LbxMxELZKQVUvPMorUMBI0FNX3bdtJISilIgqJFrRIHpzvbZXDaJJyW6A_Bz-Br-OmX1FSLTl0gPXrGc9cubpnfmGkBeQIwgjIHLTscud0DOpk_qQuGoVI3y6a4xS5bAJNhrxoyORrJFfTS8MllU2NrE01Gam8Y58zwPBEgF3hbuX1WURyX7_zdlXBydI4ZfWZpxGJSIDu_wO6Vv--mAf_uuXvt9_O-69c-oJA46OhF84WcA8y4IsVoiSYgyLNAQoodZc-0aFQRprYDfUxkaae2EGlgGn_QhrDLg2YwN47zVynYWRj4nf0B23XiAQ5bQfzEAcX3j8j9oy7Hos-6uwtiwuUVb94DzPeF7kW3rA_q3_-exuk5t13E27laLcIWt2ukU2hnVlwRbZSSoM7-UuHa9a0vJdukOTFbr38i752bRy0wbPhc4ymiCKyOJ0capS2qvL-umnSXFCe7ZY_Jjg75MpLCtRbPPqEVhk4-AdOB186B7SoS0U9nfBq3uwGboi4LiHajkHplRBEyymQ7B3Q7s4250e1hdBFHEf6l665T3y8UpO8j5Zn86m9iGhisUmMKlIVWxCozRXQsd-apWNWBYJr0PiRsakrkHgcRbJF9lU-32WrXBKFE7pBhKEs0PclvCswkG5nIQ3QiybNl9wTBJ89eWk7G-kNq8NbC49mfvSLWsTBaoXpBWIlRh3yKuWso4hq9jw37bdbvRHrnZqladDnrePwQjjlzU1tbMFrGGCCwGxfXTBGu5yhlAFwOODSo_bk_QZloty9uhiBp6RDdBb-f5gNHhMNpHxqmhxm6wX84V9Qm7ob8Uknz8tTRElx1etv78BCJXQ4g |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Economic+Analysis+of+Panitumumab+Compared+With+Cetuximab+in+Patients+With+Wild-type+KRAS+Metastatic+Colorectal+Cancer+That+Progressed+After+Standard+Chemotherapy&rft.jtitle=Clinical+therapeutics&rft.au=Graham%2C+Christopher+N&rft.au=Maglinte%2C+Gregory+A&rft.au=Schwartzberg%2C+Lee+S&rft.au=Price%2C+Timothy+J&rft.date=2016-06-01&rft.pub=Elsevier+Limited&rft.issn=0149-2918&rft.eissn=1879-114X&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1376&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.clinthera.2016.03.023&rft.externalDBID=HAS_PDF_LINK&rft.externalDocID=4316742291 |
| thumbnail_m | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/image/custom?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.clinicalkey.com%2Fck-thumbnails%2F01492918%2FS0149291816X00069%2Fcov150h.gif |