Potential Cost Savings of Oral Versus Intravenous Etoposide in the Treatment of Small Cell Lung Cancer

S. Pashko, D. H. Johnson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

An economic analysis was conducted on a randomised multicentre study comparing the use of intravenous (IV) etoposide versus oral etoposide treatment regimens in patients with small cell lung cancer. 41 patients received cisplatin 100 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on study day 1 and etoposide 120 mg/m2 IV on study days 1, 2, and 3 (IV regimen); and 42 patients received cisplatin 100 mg/m2 IV and etoposide 120 mg/m2 IV on study day 1 and 240 mg/m2 orally (equivalent to 120 mg/m2 IV) on study days 2 and 3 (oral regimen). The results of the study from which these data were extracted showed equal efficacy between groups. Based on a retrospective review of resource use in the clinical trial, patient healthcare costs were examined in the following areas: antineoplastic drugs, IV fluids, supplies used for chemotherapy administration, and chemotherapy administration procedure fees. The total cost per course of therapy was $US2002 for the IV regimen and $US1653 for the oral regimen. This represented a 17% savings for patients receiving the oral regimen.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)293-297
Number of pages5
JournalPharmacoEconomics
Volume1
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1992

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology
  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Potential Cost Savings of Oral Versus Intravenous Etoposide in the Treatment of Small Cell Lung Cancer'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this