MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943350255 · doi:10.3747/co.26.4395

The Economic Impact of the Transition from Branded to Generic Oncology Drugs

2019· article· en· W2943350255 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Winson Y. Cheung, Emily Kornelsen, Nicole Mittmann, Natasha B. Leighl, Matthew C. Cheung, Kelvin Chan, Penelope A. Bradbury, Raymond Ng, B.E. Chen, Keyue Ding, Joseph L. Pater, Dongsheng Tu, Annette E. Hay

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCetuximabErlotinibOncologyVinorelbineLung cancerInternal medicineClinical trialGemcitabineCancerCisplatinChemotherapyEpidermal growth factor receptorColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Economic evaluations are an integral component of many clinical trials. Costs used in those analyses are based on the prices of branded drugs when they first enter the market. The effect of genericization on the cost-effectiveness (CE) or cost–utility (CU) of an intervention is unknown because economic analyses are rarely updated using the costs of generic drugs. Methods: We re-examined the CE or CU of regimens previously evaluated in Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG) studies that included prospective economic evaluations and where genericization has occurred or is anticipated in Canada. We incorporated the new costs of generic drugs to characterize changes in CE or CU. We also determined acceptable cost levels of generic drugs that would make regimens reimbursable in a publicly funded health care system. Results: The four randomized controlled trials included (representing 1979 patients) were CCTG BR.10 (early lung cancer, adjuvant vinorelbine–cisplatin vs. observation, n = 172), CCTG BR.21 (metastatic lung cancer, erlotinib vs. placebo, n = 731), CCTG CO.17 (metastatic colon cancer, cetuximab vs. best supportive care, n = 557), and CCTG LY.12 (relapsed or refractory lymphoma, gemcitabine–dexamethasone–cisplatin vs. cytarabine–dexamethasone–cisplatin, n = 619). Since the initial publication of those trials, the genericization of vinorelbine, erlotinib, cetuximab, and cisplatin has taken place or is expected in Canada. Costs of generics improved the ces and cus of treatment significantly. For example, genericization of erlotinib ($1460.25 per 30 days) resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $45,746 per life-year gained compared with $94,638 for branded erlotinib. Likewise, genericization of cetuximab ($275.80 per 100 mg) produced an icer of $261,126 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained compared with $299,613 for branded cetuximab. Decreases in the cost of generic cetuximab to $129.39 and $63.51 would further improve the icer to $150,000 and $100,000 per QALY respectively. Conclusions: Genericization of a costly oncology drug can modify the CE and CU of a regimen significantly. Failure to revisit economic analyses with the costs of generics could be a missed opportunity for funding bodies to optimize value-based allocation of health care resources. At current levels, the costs of generics might not be sufficiently low to sustain publicly funded health care systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicEconomic and Financial Impacts of CancerFrench-language works237,207