Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cost-effectiveness analysis of fruquintinib in Chinese patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

  • Research Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Colorectal cancer is a significant health concern worldwide, with metastatic CRC (mCRC) presenting a particularly challenging prognosis. The FRESCO-2 trial highlighted the potential of fruquintinib in heavily pretreated mCRC patients.

Aim

Given the recent changes in drug pricing in China and the evolving mCRC treatments, this study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of fruquintinib in the context of current Chinese healthcare standards.

Method

This study utilized data from the FRESCO-2 trial, incorporating a partitioned-survival model to simulate three health states: Progression-Free Survival, Progressive Disease, and death. Costs and utility values were derived from published literature and the FRESCO-2 trial. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the base-case result and to understand the impact of various parameters on the ICER.

Results

The base-case analysis revealed a total cost of $11,089.05 for the fruquintinib group and $5,374.48 for the placebo group. The overall QALYs were higher in the fruquintinib group (0.61 QALYs) compared to the placebo group (0.43 QALYs). The ICER was calculated to be $31,747.67 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses identified the utility of progression-free survival, the cost of fruquintinib, and the costs of best supportive care as significant determinants of ICER.

Conclusion

Fruquintinib emerges as a promising therapeutic option for refractory mCRC. However, its cost-effectiveness depends on selected willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. While the drug’s ICER surpasses the WTP based on China's 2022 GDP per capita, it remains below the threshold set at three times the national GDP.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cancer stat facts: Colorectal cancer. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/colorect.html. Accessed 28 Aug 2023.

  3. Xia C, Dong X, Li H, et al. Cancer statistics in China and United States, 2022: profiles, trends, and determinants. Chin Med J. 2022;135(5):584–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Jawed I, Wilkerson J, Prasad V, et al. Colorectal cancer survival gains and novel treatment regimens: A systematic review and analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(6):787–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Shen C, Tannenbaum D, Horn R, et al. Overall survival in phase 3 clinical trials and the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, 1986–2016: a systematic review. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5): e2213588.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Tang YL, Li DD, Duan JY, et al. Resistance to targeted therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: current status and new developments. World J Gastroenterol. 2023;29(6):926–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Li J, Qin S, Xu RH, et al. Effect of fruquintinib vs placebo on overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer: the FRESCO randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;319(24):2486–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Dasari A, Lonardi S, Garcia-Carbonero R, et al. Fruquintinib versus placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (FRESCO-2): an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study. Lancet (Lond, Engl). 2023;402(10395):41–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang PF, Xie D, Li Q. Cost-effectiveness analysis of fruquintinib as third-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Tumori. 2020;106(5):400–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Peng Z, Hou X, Huang Y, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of fruquintinib for metastatic colorectal cancer third-line treatment in China. BMC Cancer. 2020;20(1):990.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhang Y, Wushouer H, Han S, et al. The impacts of government reimbursement negotiation on targeted anticancer medication price, volume and spending in China. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(7):e006196.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Murray CJ, Evans DB, Acharya A, et al. Development of WHO guidelines on generalized cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 2000;9(3):235–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Guyot P, Ades AE, Ouwens MJ, et al. Enhanced secondary analysis of survival data: reconstructing the data from published Kaplan–Meier survival curves. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Chongqing T, Sini L, Xiaohui Z, et al. Cost-effectiveness of first-line versus second-line pembrolizumab or chemotherapy in patients with microsatellite-instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient advanced colorectal cancer. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12: 802942.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Guan X, Li H, Xiong X, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of fruquintinib versus regorafenib as the third-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer in China. J Med Econ. 2021;24(1):339–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ma Y, Zhou J, Ye Y, et al. The cost-effectiveness analysis of serplulimab versus regorafenib for treating previously treated unresectable or metastatic microsatellite instability-high or deficient mismatch repair colorectal cancer in China. Front Oncol. 2023;13:1113346.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhou T, Cao Y, Wang X, et al. Economic evaluation of sintilimab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib as a first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Adv Ther. 2022;39(5):2165–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Qin S, Kruger E, Tan SC, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFOX4 and sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China. Cost Eff Resource Alloc C/E. 2018;16:29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lang Y, Dong D, Wu B. Pembrolizumab vs the EXTREME regimen in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Clin Drug Investig. 2020;40(12):1137–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Li J, Qin S, Xu R, et al. Regorafenib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care in Asian patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CONCUR): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(6):619–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nafees B, Lloyd AJ, Dewilde S, et al. Health state utilities in non-small cell lung cancer: an international study. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2017;13(5):e195–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lloyd A, Nafees B, Narewska J, et al. Health state utilities for metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2006;95(6):683–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Leech AA, Kim DD, Cohen JT, et al. Use and misuse of cost-effectiveness analysis thresholds in low- and middle-income countries: trends in cost-per-DALY studies. Value Health J Int Soc Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018;21(7):759–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pichon-Riviere A, Drummond M, Palacios A, et al. Determining the efficiency path to universal health coverage: cost-effectiveness thresholds for 174 countries based on growth in life expectancy and health expenditures. Lancet Glob Health. 2023;11(6):e833–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ochalek J, Wang H, Gu Y, et al. Informing a cost-effectiveness threshold for health technology assessment in China: a marginal productivity approach. Pharmacoeconomics. 2020;38(12):1319–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. NICE. PMG19 Addendum A—final amendments to the NICE technology appraisal processes and methods guides to support the proposed new Cancer Drugs Fund arrangements. NICE London. 2016.

  27. Prager GW, Taieb J, Fakih M, et al. Trifluridine–tipiracil and bevacizumab in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023;388(18):1657–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Voutsadakis IA. A systematic review and meta-analysis of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: evidence from real-world series. Curr Oncol. 2023;30(6):5227–39.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by National Key Clinical Specialties Construction Program.

Funding

No specific funding was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China

    Zijia Huang, Lingyan Zhou, Hanrui Zheng & Mei Zhan

Authors
  1. Zijia Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lingyan Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hanrui Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mei Zhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mei Zhan.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 20 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Huang, Z., Zhou, L., Zheng, H. et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of fruquintinib in Chinese patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Pharm (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01721-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01721-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation