Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Cost-Effectiveness of Cabozantinib in the Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis, Pedro N. Aguiar Jr, Mónica L. Cordón, Yanin Chavarri-Guerra, and Gilberto de Lima Lopes Jr

Background: Treatment options are limited for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that progresses after treatment with sorafenib. Cabozantinib, an oral small molecule inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinase receptors, recently showed improved overall survival (OS) compared with placebo in sorafenib-pretreated patients with advanced HCC in the CELESTIAL trial. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib for second-line treatment of patients with advanced HCC from a US healthcare system perspective. Patients and Methods: Cost and utility data were extracted from the CELESTIAL trial and used to determine the cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib compared with placebo plus best supportive care. The main outcome of this study was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained by using cabozantinib compared with placebo plus best supportive care in sorafenib-pretreated HCC. Results: In the base-case analysis using data from the CELESTIAL trial, the incremental QALY and ICER were 0.067 and $1,040,675 for cabozantinib compared with placebo and best supportive care. OS reported in the CELESTIAL trial (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63–0.92) had the strongest association with the ICER. In one-way sensitivity analyses, there were no scenarios in which cabozantinib was cost-effective. In a cost-threshold analysis, cabozantinib would have to be priced at least $50 per pill to be cost-effective considering a willingness to pay of $100,000 per QALY. Although the CELESTIAL trial demonstrated that cabozantinib improves OS compared with placebo in patients with HCC that progresses after treatment with sorafenib, our analysis shows that cabozantinib is not a cost-effective therapy in this scenario. Conclusions: At current costs, cabozantinib is not cost-effective for second-line therapy of HCC in the United States.

Full access

Predicting All-Cause Mortality in Women With and Without Breast Cancer Using the Schonberg Index: A Women’s Health Initiative Study

Rebecca A. Nelson, Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis, Rowan T. Chlebowski, Mara Schonberg, Joanne Mortimer, Kathy Pan, Lifang Hou, Marian L. Neuhouser, Kerryn W. Reding, Nazmus Saquib, Jean Wactawski-Wende, Emily Wolfson, Mina S. Sedrak, and Laura Kruper

Background: When treating older women with breast cancer, life expectancy is an important consideration. ASCO recommends calculating 10-year mortality probabilities to inform treatment decisions. One useful tool is the Schonberg index, which predicts risk-based all-cause 10-year mortality. We investigated the use of this index in women aged ≥65 years with breast cancer in the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI). Methods: We calculated 10-year mortality risk scores for 2,549 WHI participants with breast cancer (“cases”) and 2,549 age-matched breast cancer–free participants (“controls”) using Schonberg index risk scoring. Risk scores were grouped into quintiles for comparisons. Risk-stratified observed mortality rates and 95% confidence intervals were compared across cases and controls. Observed 10-year mortality rates in cases and controls were also compared with Schonberg index–based predicted 10-year mortality rates. Results: Compared with controls, cases were more often white (P=.005), had higher income and education levels (P<.001 for both), more often lived with their husband/partner (P<.001), scored higher on subjective health/happiness (P<.001), and needed less assistance in activities of daily living (P<.001). Participants with breast cancer had similar risk-stratified 10-year mortality rates compared with controls (34% vs 33%, respectively). Stratified results showed that cases had slightly higher mortality rates than controls in the lowest risk quintile and lower mortality rates in the 2 highest risk quintiles. Observed mortality rates in cases and controls were similar to Schonberg index–predicted mortality, with model c-indexes of 0.71 and 0.76, respectively. Conclusions: Among women aged ≥65 years with incident breast cancer, the Schonberg index–based risk-stratified 10-year mortality rates were similar to those in women without breast cancer, demonstrating a similar performance of the index among both populations. Along with other health measures, prognostic indexes can help predict survival among older women with breast cancer and support geriatric oncology guidelines that promote using life expectancy calculation tools for shared decision-making.