Economic analysis of palonosetron versus granisetron in the standard triplet regimen for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Japan (TRIPLE phase III trial)

• Published in: Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences Vol. 4; no. 1; p. 31
• Main Authors: Shimizu, Hisanori, Suzuki, Kenichi, Uchikura, Takeshi, Tsuji, Daiki, Yamanaka, Takeharu, Hashimoto, Hironobu, Goto, Koichi, Matsui, Reiko, Seki, Nobuhiko, Shimada, Toshikazu, Ikeda, Shunya, Ikegami, Naoki, Hama, Toshihiro, Yamamoto, Nobuyuki, Sasaki, Tadanori
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 10-12-2018; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: 5-HT3 receptor antagonist; Cancer therapies; Chemotherapy; Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting; Cost analysis; Cost-effectiveness; Decision making; Economic analysis; Granisetron; Health care expenditures; Highly emetogenic chemotherapy; Medical research; Nausea; Palonosetron; Studies; Task forces; Vomiting; Japan; Highly emetogenic chemotherapy; Granisetron; Real-world data analysis; 5-HT3 receptor antagonist; Cost-effectiveness; Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting; Palonosetron
• ISSN: 2055-0294; 2055-0294
• DOI: 10.1186/s40780-018-0128-9

We conducted an economic assessment using test data from the phase III TRIPLE study, which examined the efficacy of a 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonist as part of a standard triplet antiemetic regimen including aprepitant and dexamethasone in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving cisplatin-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC).
We retrospectively investigated all medicines prescribed for antiemetic purposes within 120 h after the initiation of cisplatin administration during hospitalization. In the TRIPLE study, patients were assigned to treatment with granisetron (GRA) 1 mg (
 = 413) or palonosetron (PALO) 0.75 mg (
 = 414). The evaluation measure was the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) assessed as the cost per complete response (CR; no vomiting/retching and no rescue medication). The analysis was conducted from the public healthcare payer's perspective.
The CR rates were 59.1% in the GRA group and 65.7% in the PALO group (
 = 0.0539), and the total frequencies of rescue medication use for these groups were 717 (153/413 patients) and 573 (123/414 patients), respectively. In both groups, drugs with antidopaminergic effects were chosen as rescue medication in 86% of patients. The costs of including GRA and PALO in the standard triplet antiemetic regimen were 15,342.8 and 27,863.8 Japanese yen (JPY), respectively. In addition, the total costs of rescue medication use were 73,883.8 (range, 71,106.4-79,017.1) JPY for the GRA group and 59,292.7 (range, 57,707.5-60,972.8) JPY for the PALO group. The CERs (JPY/CR) were 26,263.4 and 42,628.6 for the GRA and PALO groups, respectively, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the groups was 189,171.6 (189,044.8-189,215.5) JPY/CR.
We found that PALO was more expensive than GRA in patients who received a cisplatin-based HEC regimen.