↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Economic evaluation of eribulin as second-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer in South Korea

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Economic evaluation of eribulin as second-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer in South Korea
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, September 2016
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s110553
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriel Tremblay, Unnati Majethia, Janis L Breeze, Ilias Kontoudis, Jeongae Park

Abstract

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is associated with poor prognosis, particularly for those patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2)-negative tumor. Similar to the rest of the world, treatment options are limited in South Korea following first-line chemotherapy with anthracyclines and/or taxanes. This study examined the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of eribulin in South Korean patients with HER2-negative MBC who have progressed after usage of at least one chemotherapeutic regimen for advanced disease (second-line therapy). A partition survival model was developed from the perspective of the South Korean health care system. The economic impact of introducing eribulin as second-line therapy for HER2-negative MBC was compared to that of capecitabine and vinorelbine. The analysis estimated incremental cost per life-year (LY), that is, cost-effectiveness, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), that is, cost-utility, of eribulin for management of HER2-negative MBC in South Korea. The model accounted for overall survival, progression-free survival, drug costs, grade 3/4 adverse events, and health care utilization. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to identify uncertainty in the results of the economic evaluation. Second-line eribulin was associated with greater benefits in terms of LY and QALY, compared to capecitabine and vinorelbine. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was ₩10.5M (approximately USD 9,200) per LY, and the incremental cost-utility ratio was ₩17M (approximately USD 14,800) per QALY in the basecase analysis. The incremental cost-utility ratio ranged from ₩12M (USD 10,461) to ₩27M (USD 23,538) per QALY in the deterministic sensitivity analysis. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, >99% of the simulations were below ₩50M (USD 42,300), and the lower and upper 95% confidence intervals were ₩3M (USD 2,600) and ₩24M (USD 20,900) per QALY, respectively. There currently exist a limited number of treatment choices for women with HER2-negative MBC. Eribulin is a cost-effective option for second-line therapy in South Korea and should be added to the current indications for reimbursement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Unspecified 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 11 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 21%
Unspecified 5 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 September 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#399
of 531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,778
of 348,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#20
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 531 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,369 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.