Open AccessEverolimus for the second-line treatment of advanced and/or metastatic renal cell cancer: a critique of the submission from Novartis
Author(s) -
Martin Pitt,
Louise Crathorne,
T Moxham,
Mary Bond,
Chris Hyde
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
hta on dvd/health technology assessment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.426
H-Index - 126
eISSN - 2046-4924
pISSN - 1366-5278
DOI - 10.3310/hta14suppl2-06
Subject(s) - medicine , everolimus , sunitinib , cost effectiveness , sorafenib , renal cell carcinoma , bevacizumab , randomized controlled trial , oncology , clinical trial , quality adjusted life year , chemotherapy , risk analysis (engineering) , hepatocellular carcinoma
This paper represents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of everolimus plus best supportive care (BSC) for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) which has progressed following or on vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy (sunitinib, sorafenib, bevacizumab), compared to BSC alone. The submitting manufacturer’s case for clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness was mainly based on a well-conducted randomised controlled trial (RCT), Renal Cell Cancer Treatment with Oral RAD001 Given Daily-1 (RECORD-1), comparing BSC plus everolimus with BSC plus placebo and a de novo economic model. The RCT indicated a marked statistically significant effect on progression-free survival. The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimate was £52,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (this included a reduction in drug cost associated with an approved patient access scheme). The ERG undertook a critical appraisal of the submission. The ERG was generally in agreement with the submitting manufacturer concerning its estimates of effectiveness; however, there was greater concern surrounding the estimates of cost-effectiveness. The ERG judged that if potential errors in the model were corrected, the ICERs offered by the submitting manufacturer would overstate the cost-effectiveness of everolimus for the second-line treatment of metastatic RCC (that this ICER would be a higher value). Concerning the estimates of cost-effectiveness in RCC, the observations in the ERG report provide strong further support for research collecting rigorous estimates of utilities associated with the main health states likely to be experienced by patients with renal cell cancer. At the time of writing, NICE was yet to issue the Appraisal Consultation Document for this appraisal.