Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Screening for KRAS and BRAF Mutations in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Authors:
- Ajay S. BehlABAjay S. Behl
- Katrina A. B. GoddardKGKatrina A. B. Goddard
- Thomas J. FlottemeschTFThomas J. Flottemesch
- David VeenstraDVDavid Veenstra
- Richard T. MeenanRMRichard T. Meenan
- Jennifer S. LinJLJennifer S. Lin
- Michael V. MaciosekMMMichael V. Maciosek
Open Access
- 4 December 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Vol. 104 (23) , 1785-1795
Abstract
In 2009, the American Society of Clinical Oncology recommended that patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who are candidates for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy have their tumors tested for KRAS mutations because tumors with such mutations do not respond to anti-EGFR therapy. Limiting anti-EGFR therapy to those without KRAS mutations will reserve treatment for those likely to benefit while avoiding unnecessary costs and harm to those who would not. Similarly, tumors with BRAF genetic mutations may not respond to anti-EGFR therapy, though this is less clear. Economic analyses of mutation testing have not fully explored the roles of alternative therapies and resection of metastases. This paper is based on a decision analytic framework that forms the basis of a cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for KRAS and BRAF mutations in mCRC in the context of treatment with cetuximab. A cohort of 50 000 patients with mCRC is simulated 10 000 times, with attributes randomly assigned on the basis of distributions from randomized controlled trials. Screening for both KRAS and BRAF mutations compared with the base strategy (of no anti-EGFR therapy) increases expected overall survival by 0.034 years at a cost of $22 033, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of approximately $650 000 per additional year of life. Compared with anti-EGFR therapy without screening, adding KRAS testing saves approximately $7500 per patient; adding BRAF testing saves another $1023, with little reduction in expected survival. Screening for KRAS and BFAF mutation improves the cost-effectiveness of anti-EGFR therapy, but the incremental cost effectiveness ratio remains above the generally accepted threshold for acceptable cost effectiveness ratio of $100 000/quality adjusted life year.Keywords
This publication has 51 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effects of KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA mutations on the efficacy of cetuximab plus chemotherapy in chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective consortium analysisThe Lancet Oncology, 2010
- Markers for EGFR pathway activation as predictor of outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with or without cetuximabEuropean Journal of Cancer, 2010
- Clinicopathological features and outcome in advanced colorectal cancer patients with synchronous vs metachronous metastasesBritish Journal of Cancer, 2010
- Colorectal cancerThe Lancet, 2010
- Tumour response and secondary resectability of colorectal liver metastases following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cetuximab: the CELIM randomised phase 2 trialThe Lancet Oncology, 2010
- K-rasMutations and Benefit from Cetuximab in Advanced Colorectal CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- At what costs will screening with CT colonography be competitive? A cost‐effectiveness approachInternational Journal of Cancer, 2008
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of cetuximab/irinotecan vs active/best supportive care for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who have failed previous chemotherapy treatmentBritish Journal of Cancer, 2007
- Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Before Liver Resection for Patients With Unresectable Liver Metastases From Colorectal CarcinomaJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2005
- Resection of Nonresectable Liver Metastases from Colorectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant ChemotherapyAnnals of Surgery, 1996