Skip to main content
Log in

Costs of treatment of colorectal cancer in different settings in Germany

  • Original Papers
  • Published:
The European Journal of Health Economics, formerly: HEPAC Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost implications of different settings (inpatient, outpatient/day clinic, or office-based oncologists) for the administration of standard fluoropyrimidine therapies, i.e., Mayo Clinic and Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO)/Ardalan regimen, and to compare the results with the cost of oral capecitabine in Germany. In total, 89 quarterly fee-listings from 26 patients provided by 5 office-based oncologists were analyzed. Physician’s services, drug costs, pharmacy costs, and costs for implantable venous port systems and single-use pumps were considered. Findings were transferred to the hospital setting. A third-party payer perspective was applied. Quarterly treatment costs for the Mayo Clinic regimen varied between € 2,036 and € 10,569, and between € 1,294 and € 10,179 for the AIO/Ardalan regimen depending on the treatment setting. Projected costs for capecitabine were € 2,338. No hospitalization was considered to be necessary for capecitabine due to its oral administration route. The most expensive treatment options were the AIO/Ardalan protocol in the office-based setting and the Mayo Clinic protocol in the hospital setting. Capecitabine emerged as the cheapest option in the office-based setting. Overall, the cheapest option was the AIO/Ardalan protocol in municipal hospitals. However, municipal hospitals are unlikely to cover their costs in this situation. Substantial cost savings without incurring losses to providers may be realized if patients are transferred from the hospital setting to the office-based setting and treated with capecitabine.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Robert-Koch-Institut, Berlin, Germany (2003) http://www.rki.de/gbe/krebs/krebs.htm. Cited 20 Oct 2003

  2. Jonker DJ, Maroun JA, Kocha W (2002) Survival benefit of chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Cancer 82:1789–1794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Grothey A, Kellermann L, Schmoll HJ (2002) Defizite in der Behandlung von Patienten mit kolorektalem Karzinom in Deutschland. Med Klin 97:270–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Twelves C, Xeloda Study Group (2002) Capecitabine as first-line treatment in colorectal cancer. Pooled data from two large, phase III trials. Eur J Cancer 38[Suppl 2]:15–20

  5. Herold M, Sacchi S, Hieke K (2002) The cost of treating relapsed indolent Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma in an international setting: retrospective analysis of resource use. Haematologica 87:719–729

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Herold M, Hieke K (2003) Costs of drug delivery for CHOP, COP/CVP and fludarabine: an international assessment. Value Health 6:167–174

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Twelves C, Boyer M, Findlay M, et al (2001) Capecitabine (Xeloda™) improves medical resource use compared with 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin in a phase III trial conducted in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma. Eur J Cancer 37:597–604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence) UK (2003) Final appraisal determination—capecitabine and tegafur with uracil for metastatic colorectal cancer. http://www.nice.org.uk/pdf/FAD_capecitabineacolorectalcancer.pdf. Cited March 2003

  9. Hieke K, Twelves C, Boyer M (2000) Economic consequences of differences in the adverse-events (AE)-profile of capecitabine vs. Mayo Clinic-regimen in previously untreated advanced/metastatic colorectal cancer. Value Health 3:351

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cassidy J, Twelves C, Van Cutsem E, et al (2002) First-line oral capecitabine therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a favorable safety profile compared with intravenous 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin. Ann Oncol 13:566–575

    Google Scholar 

  11. Liu G, Franssen E, Fitch MI, et al (1997) Patient preferences for oral versus intravenous palliative chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 15:110–115

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Borras JM, Sanchez-Hernandez A, Navarro M, et al (2001) Compliance, satisfaction, and quality of life of patients with colorectal cancer receiving home chemotherapy or outpatient treatment: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ 322:1–5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest:

No comment.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Klaus Hieke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hieke, K., Kleeberg, U.R., Stauch, M. et al. Costs of treatment of colorectal cancer in different settings in Germany. Eur J Health Econom 5, 270–273 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-003-0220-3

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-003-0220-3

Keywords

Navigation