Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=23870108
&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 278.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 278.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 278.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 278.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\23870108
.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117 Health+Technol+Assess
2013 ; 17
(29
): 1-386
Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and
economic evaluation, of denosumab for the treatment of bone metastases from solid
tumours
#MMPMID23870108
Ford J
; Cummins E
; Sharma P
; Elders A
; Stewart F
; Johnston R
; Royle P
; Jones R
; Mulatero C
; Todd R
; Mowatt G
Health Technol Assess
2013[Jul]; 17
(29
): 1-386
PMID23870108
show ga
BACKGROUND: Denosumab offers an alternative, or additional, treatment for the
prevention of skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with bone metastases
from solid tumours. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to assess the clinical
effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of denosumab, within its licensed
indication, for the prevention of SREs in patients with bone metastases from
solid tumours. DATA SOURCES: Databases searched were MEDLINE (1948 to April
2011), EMBASE (1980 to March 2011), The Cochrane Library (all sections; Issue 1,
2011) and Web of Science with Conference Proceedings (1970 to May 2011). REVIEW
METHODS: Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing denosumab,
bisphosphonates (BPs) or best supportive care (BSC) in patients with bone
metastases were included. Systematic reviews and observational studies were used
for safety and quality-of-life assessments. Study quality was assessed using the
Cochrane risk of bias tool. Studies suitable for meta-analysis were synthesised
using network meta-analysis (NMA). A systematic review was conducted for cost,
quality-of-life and cost-effectiveness studies. The results of this informed the
cost-utility modelling. This principally estimated the cost-effectiveness of
denosumab relative to zoledronic acid for when BPs are currently recommended and
relative to BSC when BPs are not recommended or are contraindicated. RESULTS: A
literature search identified 39 studies (eight suitable for NMA). Denosumab was
effective in delaying time to first SRE and reducing the risk of multiple SREs
compared with zoledronic acid. Generally speaking, denosumab was similar to
zoledronic acid for quality of life, pain, overall survival and safety. The NMA
demonstrated that denosumab was more effective in delaying SREs than placebo, but
was limited by numerous uncertainties. Cost-utility modelling results for
denosumab relative to zoledronic acid were driven by the availability of the
patient access scheme (PAS) for denosumab. Without this, denosumab was not
estimated to be cost-effective compared with zoledronic acid. With it, the
cost-effectiveness ranged between dominance for breast and prostate cancer, to
between £5400 and £15,300 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for other solid
tumours (OSTs) including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and £12,700 per QALY
for NSCLC. Owing to small patient gains estimated, the cost-effectiveness of
denosumab was very sensitive to the zoledronic acid price. Denosumab was not
estimated to be cost-effective compared with BSC. LIMITATIONS: Only subgroup data
were available for denosumab for NSCLC, and OSTs excluding NSCLC. The NMA was
subject to numerous uncertainties. Owing to small patient gains estimated, the
cost-effectiveness of denosumab was very sensitive to the zoledronic acid price.
CONCLUSION: Denosumab, compared with zoledronic acid and placebo, is effective in
delaying SREs, but is similar with regard to quality of life and pain.
Cost-effectiveness showed that without the PAS denosumab was not estimated to be
cost-effective relative to either zoledronic acid or BSC. With the PAS, denosumab
was estimated to be cost-effective relative to zoledronic acid but not BSC. STUDY
REGISTRATION: PROSPERO number CRD42011001418. FUNDING: The National Institute for
Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
|Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/*economics/*therapeutic use
[MESH]
|Bone Density Conservation Agents/economics/therapeutic use
[MESH]