Cancer Treatment Reviews
Volume 37, Issue 3 , Pages 242-249, May 2011

Topotecan for relapsed small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and economic evaluation

  • Debbie Hartwell

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +44 23 8059 5632; fax: +44 23 8059 5662.
  • ,
  • Jeremy Jones

      Affiliations

    • Tel.: +44 23 8059 7056; fax: +44 23 8059 5662.
  • ,
  • Emma Loveman

      Affiliations

    • Tel.: +44 23 8056 5628; fax: +44 23 8056 5662.
  • ,
  • Petra Harris

      Affiliations

    • Tel.: +44 23 8059 5614; fax: +44 23 8059 5662.
  • ,
  • Andrew Clegg

      Affiliations

    • Tel.: +44 23 8059 5597; fax: +44 23 8059 5662.
  • ,
  • Alex Bird

      Affiliations

    • Tel.: +44 23 8059 5941; fax: +44 23 8059 5662.

Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre (SHTAC), University of Southampton, First Floor Epsilon House, Enterprise Road, Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK

Received 29 March 2010; received in revised form 12 July 2010; accepted 14 July 2010. published online 16 August 2010.

Summary 

Background

Topotecan is a relatively new drug for use as a second-line treatment in patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We performed a systematic review and economic evaluation of topotecan, and consider it here in relation to the NICE end of life criteria.

Methods

Seventeen bibliographic databases (including Cochrane library, Medline and Embase) were searched from 1990 to February 2009, and experts and manufacturers were consulted, to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which were selected according to prospectively defined criteria. An economic evaluation was undertaken to assess cost effectiveness compared with best supportive care (BSC) in the UK.

Results

Five RCTs were included. The clinical evidence indicates a statistically significant benefit of oral topotecan plus BSC compared to BSC alone for overall survival. Intravenous topotecan was similar in efficacy to both oral topotecan and CAV (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and vincristine). In the survival model, oral topotecan plus BSC was associated with an average gain in life expectancy of approximately 4months, resulting in a gain of 0.183 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). At an incremental cost of approximately £6200 the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) is £33,851 per QALY gained.

Conclusions

Compared with BSC alone, oral topotecan for patients with relapsed SCLC was associated with improved health outcomes but at increased cost. The ICER is at the upper extreme of the range conventionally regarded as cost effective from an NHS decision making perspective. However, this treatment may fall under supplementary guidance for life extending, end of life treatments.

Keywords: Small cell lung cancer, Topotecan, Treatment, Systematic review, Cost effectiveness

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0305-7372(10)00130-1

doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2010.07.005

Cancer Treatment Reviews
Volume 37, Issue 3 , Pages 242-249, May 2011