24.12.2012 Views

Download the ESMO 2012 Abstract Book - Oxford Journals

Download the ESMO 2012 Abstract Book - Oxford Journals

Download the ESMO 2012 Abstract Book - Oxford Journals

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Novartis, Genentech, and sanofi-aventis. All o<strong>the</strong>r authors have declared no<br />

conflicts of interest.<br />

335P DYSPHONIA AS A PREVIOUSLY UNREPORTED SIDE EFFECT<br />

OF BEVACIZUMAB TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH<br />

METASTATIC BREAST CANCER<br />

S.A. Radema 1 , P. Souverein 2 , R. Meyboom 2 , F. Ahmadizar 2 , C. Onland-Moret 2 ,<br />

A. Maitland-Vd Zee 2<br />

1 Internal Medicine, Gelre Ziekenhuizen, Apeldoorn, NETHERLANDS,<br />

2 Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology<br />

and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, NETHERLANDS<br />

Introduction: Bevacizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against<br />

vascular endo<strong>the</strong>lial growth factor A and has been approved for <strong>the</strong> treatment of<br />

several metastatic tumours. There is considerable heterogeneity in <strong>the</strong> response to<br />

treatment with bevacizumab, both in effectiveness and in toxicity. Here we describe a<br />

previously unreported adverse drug reaction (adr) in pts with MBC treated with<br />

bevacizumab.<br />

Methods: In a teaching hospital in <strong>the</strong> Ne<strong>the</strong>rlands (from Sep 2009 to Jul 2011), 32<br />

consecutive pts with MBC treated with chemo<strong>the</strong>rapy and bevacizumab were<br />

registered in a retrospective database. TNM stage, comorbidities, concomitant<br />

medication, prior treatment for <strong>the</strong> primary tumour, date of metastatic disease, prior<br />

treatment for metastatic disease and toxicities were recorded. The WHO global<br />

individual case safety report database, VigiBase, contains summaries of suspected<br />

spontaneous case reports summated by health care professionals and pts to national<br />

pharmacovigilance centres . As of May 2010, VigiBase contained >5 million case<br />

reports. . We searched <strong>the</strong> VigiBase extraction of Dec 2011 for dysphonia. Reporting<br />

odds ratios (ROR) were calculated for <strong>the</strong> occurrence of dysphonia compared with<br />

o<strong>the</strong>r adr for bevacizumab and paclitaxel.<br />

Results: In total, 9/32 pts (28%) reported dysphonia during treatment with<br />

bevacizumab and 5/9 pts underwent ENT examination. In several pts marked<br />

oedema of <strong>the</strong> vocal cords and/or chronic laryngitis were found. As of Dec 2011,<br />

6,880,361 reports were available in VigiBase, of which16,239 were related to<br />

dysphonia. For bevacizumab <strong>the</strong>re were 51 reports for dysphonia and 46,041 reports<br />

for o<strong>the</strong>r adr. Corresponding figures for all o<strong>the</strong>r drugs were 22,108 reports for<br />

dysphonia and 25,151,628 reports for o<strong>the</strong>r adverse effects: ROR of 1.26 (95% CI:<br />

0.95-1.66). For paclitaxel <strong>the</strong>re were 45 reports for dysphonia and 85,988 reports for<br />

o<strong>the</strong>r adr. Corresponding figures for all o<strong>the</strong>r drugs were 22,114 reports for<br />

dysphonia and 25,111,681 reports for o<strong>the</strong>r adverse effects: ROR of 0.59 (95% CI:<br />

0.44-0.80)meaning that <strong>the</strong> risk of angiooedema is significantly higher in<br />

bevacizumab users compared to paclitaxel users.<br />

Conclusion: Dysphonia is a previously unreported side-effect in pts with MBC<br />

treated with bevacizumab and paclitaxel.<br />

Disclosure: S.A. Radema: I am member of an advisory board for Roche. All o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

authors have declared no conflicts of interest.<br />

336P PATTERNS OF CLINICAL MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCE<br />

UTILIZATION FOR POSTMENOPAUSAL<br />

HORMONE-RECEPTOR–POSITIVE HER2-NEGATIVE (HR+<br />

HER2–) ADVANCED BREAST CANCER (ABC) IN EUROPE<br />

G. Jerusalem 1 , N. Marinsek 2 , J. Ricci 3 , J. Etchberger 2 , R. Degun 2 , G. Benelli 4 ,<br />

S. Saletan 5 , F. André 6<br />

1 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire du Sart Tilman, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire<br />

du Sart Tilman, Liège, BELGIUM, 2 Navigant Consulting, Inc, Navigant<br />

Consulting, Inc, London, UNITED KINGDOM, 3 Wellmera AG, Wellmera AG,<br />

Basel, SWITZERLAND, 4 Novartis Farma S.p.a., Saronno, ITALY, 5 Onco Ex Dir<br />

Clinical Res Phys, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ,<br />

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 6 Breast Cancer Unit, Institut Gustave Roussy,<br />

Villejuif, FRANCE<br />

Objective: To understand treatment patterns and quantify resource utilization of<br />

HR + HER2 − aBC, with <strong>the</strong> overall aim of comparing costs and disease burden as<br />

patients progress from hormonal <strong>the</strong>rapy (HT) to chemo<strong>the</strong>rapy (CT).<br />

Methods: We conducted a chart audit in France, Germany, The Ne<strong>the</strong>rlands,<br />

Belgium, and Sweden of 375 living and deceased postmenopausal female patients (75<br />

per country) diagnosed with ER + HER2 − aBC in <strong>the</strong> past 4 years. Patients were<br />

required to have progressed on ≥ 1 line of prior HT ei<strong>the</strong>r in <strong>the</strong> adjuvant or<br />

advanced setting and to have completed ≥ 1 line of CT treatment (minimum 2 full<br />

cycles) in <strong>the</strong> aBC setting. The chart audit was completed online using a<br />

standardized form developed with <strong>the</strong> assistance of European academic physicians,<br />

pharmacy directors, and hospital administrators. Participation was sought from 25<br />

oncologists per country, except in Germany (15 oncologists and 10 gynecologists to<br />

reflect local clinical practice). Data collection was compliant with European and<br />

country market research regulations.<br />

Results: Our report details <strong>the</strong> patient care pathway, CT side effects, and resource<br />

utilization in <strong>the</strong> inpatient and outpatient settings throughout <strong>the</strong> continuum of aBC<br />

Annals of Oncology<br />

care. Preliminary analyses indicate that 55% of HR + HER2 − aBC patients are first<br />

treated with HT and switch to CT after 1.5 lines of HT. This switch is primarily<br />

influenced by <strong>the</strong> extent (56%) and progression rate (36%) of metastases. The switch<br />

from HT to CT is associated with increased resource utilization and <strong>the</strong> associated<br />

costs of treating aBC. In addition to cost of drug <strong>the</strong>rapies, <strong>the</strong> main drivers of cost<br />

are treatment for CT side effects (chiefly febrile neutropenia and diarrhea) and<br />

related hospitalization events. CT side effects that have <strong>the</strong> greatest impact on <strong>the</strong><br />

overall disease burden of aBC include alopecia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and<br />

peripheral neuropathy.<br />

Conclusions: Our results highlight <strong>the</strong> increased costs and disease burden for<br />

postmenopausal ER + HER2 − aBC patients treated with CT versus HT.<br />

Disclosure: G. Jerusalem: Consultant, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. N.<br />

Marinsek: Consultant, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. J. Ricci: Advisor,<br />

consultant, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. J. Etchberger: Consultant,<br />

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. R. Degun: Consultant, Novartis<br />

Pharmaceuticals Corporation. G. Benelli: Employees of Novartis with stock/stock<br />

options. S. Saletan: Employee of Novartis with stock/stock options. F. André:<br />

Financial support from sanofi-aventis, Novartis, Roche, AstraZeneca<br />

337P EFFICIENCY FRONTIER ANALYSIS (EFA) OF METASTATIC<br />

BREAST CANCER (MBC) TREATMENTS: A UK PERSPECTIVE<br />

C. Burudpakdee 1 , D. Bertwistle 2<br />

1 Health Economics and Outcomes Research, IMS Health, Philadelphia, PA,<br />

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2 Heor, IMS Health, London, UNITED KINGDOM<br />

Background: As newer <strong>the</strong>rapies for mBC become available, understanding <strong>the</strong><br />

efficiency of <strong>the</strong>se <strong>the</strong>rapies will be important for HTA recommendations and<br />

treatment decisions. EFA may be a useful method of assessing <strong>the</strong> efficiency of newer<br />

interventions. The EFA displays <strong>the</strong> outlay (cost) and gains with technologies, and<br />

displays <strong>the</strong> next most efficient option going forward. This study was designed to<br />

evaluate whe<strong>the</strong>r EFA could be useful in identifying <strong>the</strong> efficiency of mBC <strong>the</strong>rapies<br />

adopted by <strong>the</strong> NHS, and to identify <strong>the</strong> efficiency frontier for newer technologies.<br />

Methods: A literature search was performed to identify mBC treatments that<br />

underwent HTA in <strong>the</strong> UK. Reports were reviewed to identify treatment efficacy and<br />

HTA recommendations. Costs were determined for a course of treatment. The<br />

incremental costs per patient were plotted on <strong>the</strong> horizontal axis and incremental<br />

median overall survival (ΔOS) of each treatment was plotted on <strong>the</strong> vertical axis to<br />

construct <strong>the</strong> EFA line. Treatments below this line are considered inefficient options.<br />

Treatments above this line have better OS and may redefine <strong>the</strong> efficiency frontier.<br />

Treatments in <strong>the</strong> upper right quadrant beyond <strong>the</strong> frontier line are in an area where<br />

ceiling price has not been defined. Treatments in <strong>the</strong> lower right quadrant beyond<br />

<strong>the</strong> frontier line are inefficient due to higher cost for lower OS.<br />

Results: Ten reports that evaluated efficacy in terms of median OS were included in<br />

<strong>the</strong> EFA. The <strong>the</strong>rapies are paclitaxel albumin, gemcitabine, trastuzumab,<br />

bevacizumab, lapatinib, eribulin and fulvestrant. On <strong>the</strong> frontier line are paclitaxel<br />

albumin (ΔOS of 2.3 months at £2020), gemcitabine (ΔOS of 2.8 months at £6020),<br />

and trastuzumab (ΔOS of 4 months at £16939); all received positive<br />

recommendations. Lapatinib (ΔOS of 1.9 months at £10180), bevacizumab (ΔOS of<br />

1.7 months at £36560), eribulin (ΔOS of 2.5 months at £4834) and fulvestrant (ΔOS<br />

of 2.3 months at £2481) are all below <strong>the</strong> frontier line and received negative<br />

recommendations.<br />

Conclusion: EFA may be a useful method for assessing <strong>the</strong> efficiency of new mBC<br />

treatment options for clinical use. Fur<strong>the</strong>r studies are needed to better understand<br />

value in terms of efficiency of treatments in o<strong>the</strong>r tumor types and disease areas.<br />

Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.<br />

338P A CONJOINT ANALYSIS OF WILLINGNESS TO PAY TO AVOID<br />

METASTATIC BREAST CANCER SIDE EFFECTS<br />

D. Lalla 1 , M. Brammer 1 , R. Carlton 2 , T. Bramley 2 ,A.D’Souza 3<br />

1 Health Outcomes, Genentech/Roche, South San Francisco, CA, UNITED<br />

STATES OF AMERICA, 2 Global Value Strategies, Xcenda, Palm Harbor, FL,<br />

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 3 Data Analytics, Xcenda, Palm Harbor, FL,<br />

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA<br />

Background: Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are treated with a variety<br />

of regimens with differing side effect profiles. In addition to efficacy, side effect<br />

profile can be an important consideration in <strong>the</strong>rapy choice. Conjoint analysis is a<br />

research method used to evaluate how trade-offs are made between different<br />

attributes. This study assessed <strong>the</strong> willingness to pay (WTP) to avoid side effects<br />

related to MBC treatment using conjoint analysis. The WTP thus informs clinicians<br />

of patients’ preferences and which side effects <strong>the</strong>y are most desirous of avoiding.<br />

Methods: An online, self-administered survey of MBC patients in <strong>the</strong> US was<br />

conducted. The survey was fielded with a sample of adult female patients with a<br />

diagnosis of MBC. Key variables (attributes) included in <strong>the</strong> analysis and with levels<br />

described in lay terms were: Alopecia, Diarrhea, Fatigue, Pain, Nausea, Neuropathy,<br />

Neutropenia and Out of pocket costs. 15 scenarios (choice-based conjoint questions)<br />

ix122 | <strong>Abstract</strong>s Volume 23 | Supplement 9 | September <strong>2012</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!