RESUMO

AIM: Skeletal-related events (SREs) are major bone complications that frequently occur in patients with solid tumors (ST) and bone metastases, and in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). SREs include pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation to bone, and surgery to bone. Limited data are available regarding the burden of SREs in Latin America. We built an economic model to quantify the current and future economic burden of SREs among adults in four Latin American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review with a systematic search strategy was conducted to parameterize the economic burden of illness (BOI) model. Economic analyses were conducted using a prevalence-based model. Aggregate SRE costs obtained from country-specific sources were used. We also included patient productivity losses. Costs were expressed in 2020 USD for the total annual burden, annual burden per 1,000 at risk, and projected five-year burden. RESULTS: The estimated total number of SREs was 251,503 in 2020, amounting to a total annual cost of USD 1.4 billion. The total projected five-year cost was USD 6.9 billion. Annual costs were highest in Brazil (USD 779.1 million), followed by Mexico (USD 281.8 million), Argentina (USD 174.6 million), and Colombia (USD 120.1 million). The average financial burden per 1,000 at risk was greatest in Brazil (USD 3.6 million), followed by Mexico (USD 3.4 million), Colombia (USD 2.9 million), and Argentina (USD 2.7 million). CONCLUSION: Despite recommendations by medical societies for the use of bone-targeted agents in patients with solid tumors and bone metastasis or with multiple myeloma and bone lesions, a large proportion of patients at risk of experiencing SREs are not treated. Early detection of bone metastases and SREs and the use of the most effective preventative treatments are needed to decrease the clinical and economic burden of SREs in Latin America.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Objetivo: Estimar o custo por evento relacionado ao esqueleto (ERE) e o impacto econômico anual da adoção de denosumabe em pacientes com metástases ósseas secundárias ao câncer de mama, próstata e outros tumores sólidos ou mieloma múltiplo sob a perspectiva do sistema de saúde privado brasileiro. Métodos: Um modelo econômico foi desenvolvido para comparar os custos relacionados com denosumabe versus ácido zoledrônico na prevenção de EREs. O modelo incluiu os seguintes custos: medicamento, administração, monitoramento e manejo de ERE. O custo anual foi apresentado em reais (BRL) para 100 pacientes. Os custos do manejo de ERE [fratura vertebral (FV), fratura não vertebral (FNV), radiação óssea (RO), cirurgia óssea (CO) e compressão da medula espinhal (CME)] foram estimados a partir dos recursos e procedimentos coletados da revisão de literatura, bases de dados e painel Delphi. Dados coletados dos estudos clínicos randomizados relacionados com cada tipo de tumor na análise e de um estudo prospectivo observacional foram utilizados para estimar a eficácia clínica de denosumabe versus ácido zoledrônico. Resultados: O custo por cada tipo de ERE variou de BRL 27.246 a BRL 28.035 para FV, BRL 18.023 a BRL 18.811 para FNV, BRL 42.750 a BRL 43.538 para RO, BRL 18.023 a BRL 18.811 para CO e BRL 12.472 a BRL 13.260 para CME. A introdução de denosumabe foi estimada em economia anual por 100 pacientes de até BRL 1.072.043,14 para câncer de mama, BRL 1.212.822,79 para outros tumores sólidos, BRL 1.929.660,67 para câncer de próstata e BRL 77.965,07 para mieloma múltiplo. Conclusão: Esta análise sugere que EREs adicionam custos substanciais no manejo de pacientes com metástases ósseas. Dessa forma, o uso de denosumabe pode prevenir e retardar EREs em pacientes com câncer e pode possivelmente levar à redução do impacto econômico associado aos EREs sob a perspectiva dos pagadores de saúde privada brasileira.

Objective: To estimate the cost per SRE and annual economic impact of denosumab adoption in patients with bone metastases (BM) secondary to breast cancer, prostate cancer, other solid tumors or multiple myeloma from the Brazilian private healthcare system's perspective. Methods: An economic model was developed to compare the cost outcomes associated with denosumab instead of zoledronic acid for SRE prevention. The model included the following costs: drug, administration, monitoring and SRE management. Annual costs per 100 patients were reported in 2019 Brazilian currency (BRL). The SRE management costs (vertebral fracture (VF), non-vertebral fracture (NVF), radiation to bone (RB), surgery to bone (SB) and spinal cord compression (SCC)) were estimated from the resources and procedures collected from literature review, official database, and a Delphi panel. Data collected from randomized clinical trials related to each tumor type in the analysis and from a prospective observational study was used to estimate the clinical efficacy of denosumab vs zoledronic acid. Results: The cost per each type of SREs across all tumors ranged BRL 27,246 ­ BRL 28,035 for VF, BRL 18,023 ­ BRL 18,811 for NVF, BRL 42,750 ­ BRL 43,538 for RB, BRL 18,023 ­ BRL 18,811 for SB and BRL 12,472 ­ BRL 13,260 for SCC. The introduction of denosumab was estimated to result in annual savings per 100 patients of up to BRL 1,072,043.14 for breast cancer, BRL 1,212,822.79 for other solid tumors, BRL 1,929,660.67 for prostate cancer and BRL 77,965.07 for multiple myeloma. Conclusion: This analysis suggests that SREs add substantial costs to the management of patients with bone metastases. In this way, the use of denosumab would prevent and delay SREs in cancer patients and might possibly lead to reduce the economic burden associated with SREs, borne by Brazilian private healthcare payers.

Assuntos