Skip to main content
Top
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 6/2004

01-04-2004 | Original Research Article

Measuring Treatment Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Docetaxel in Advanced Ovarian Cancer

Authors: George Dranitsaris, Julia Elia-Pacitti, Wayne Cottrell

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 6/2004

Login to get access

Abstract

Background: Docetaxel is an equally active alternative to paclitaxel in advanced ovarian cancer but has a different adverse effect profile. Whilst paclitaxel is associated with less haematological toxicity, such as febrile neutropenia and anaemia, docetaxel causes less sensory and motor neuropathy.
Objective: To measure the economic value and preference scores for docetaxel as an alternative to paclitaxel in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.
Design and setting: A cost-benefit analysis using a consumer-based willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach was conducted. The study population consisted of a patient surrogate sample comprised of 80 oncology pharmacists and nurses from eight Canadian provinces. Background information on ovarian cancer was provided including its current management, and differences in adverse effects between docetaxel and paclitaxel. Respondents were then asked what their preferred product would be if they were diagnosed with ovarian cancer and how much they would be willing to pay per cycle for six cycles in the form of a co-payment (i.e. user’s fee) for the product of their choice. The maximum willingness to pay for docetaxel was then compared against the incremental cost (acquisition and administration) of the drug.
Study perspective: Canadian healthcare system perspective.
Main outcome measures and results: The WTP survey instrument was simple to administer and easily understood by participants. Respondents ranked motor neuropathy as being the most unpleasant adverse effect of treatment. Of the sample, 63.8% preferred to use docetaxel instead of paclitaxel (p = 0.075). The patient surrogate sample was willing to pay a mean of 64 Canadian dollars ($Can; 2003 values) [95% CI $Can33, $Can92] per cycle for the benefits offered by docetaxel as an alternative to paclitaxel. This estimate was marginally lower than the incremental cost of $Can87 per cycle of docetaxel.
Conclusion: A substantial portion of Canadian patients with ovarian cancer would likely prefer to be treated with docetaxel instead of paclitaxel for the management of their disease and would be willing to pay a portion of the incremental cost. Therefore, both options should be offered to patients, and selection of treatment can be based on reducing the risk of the toxicity that concerns the patient the most.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference American Cancer Society. Cancer facts & figures 2000. New York (NY): American Cancer Society, 2000 American Cancer Society. Cancer facts & figures 2000. New York (NY): American Cancer Society, 2000
2.
go back to reference National Cancer Institute of Canada. Canadian cancer statistics 2001. Toronto (ON): Health Canada, 2001 National Cancer Institute of Canada. Canadian cancer statistics 2001. Toronto (ON): Health Canada, 2001
3.
go back to reference 3. du Bois A. Treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Eur I Cancer 2001; 37 Suppl. 9: SI-7 3. du Bois A. Treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Eur I Cancer 2001; 37 Suppl. 9: SI-7
4.
go back to reference McGuire WP, Hoskins WI, Brady MF, et al. Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer. N Engl I Med 1996; 334: 1–6CrossRef McGuire WP, Hoskins WI, Brady MF, et al. Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer. N Engl I Med 1996; 334: 1–6CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Neijt IP, Engelholm SA, Tuxen MK, et al. Exploratory phase III study of paclitaxel and cisplatin versus paclitaxel and carboplatin in advanced ovarian cancer. I Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 3084–92 Neijt IP, Engelholm SA, Tuxen MK, et al. Exploratory phase III study of paclitaxel and cisplatin versus paclitaxel and carboplatin in advanced ovarian cancer. I Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 3084–92
6.
go back to reference Nabholtz JM, Senn HI, Bezwoda WR, et al. Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus mitomycin plus vinblastine in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing regimen. I Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1413–24 Nabholtz JM, Senn HI, Bezwoda WR, et al. Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus mitomycin plus vinblastine in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing regimen. I Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1413–24
7.
go back to reference Shepherd FA, Dancey I, Ramlau R, et al. Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus best supportive care in patients with non-small cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. I Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2095–103 Shepherd FA, Dancey I, Ramlau R, et al. Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus best supportive care in patients with non-small cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. I Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2095–103
8.
go back to reference The Scottish Gynaecologic Cancer Trials Group. A phase III comparison of paclitaxel-carboplatin (PC) and docetaxelcarboplatin (DC) as first-line chemotherapy for Stage Ie-IV epithelial ovarian cancer [abstract 804]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2001; 20: 202a The Scottish Gynaecologic Cancer Trials Group. A phase III comparison of paclitaxel-carboplatin (PC) and docetaxelcarboplatin (DC) as first-line chemotherapy for Stage Ie-IV epithelial ovarian cancer [abstract 804]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2001; 20: 202a
9.
go back to reference O’Brien B, Gafni A. When do the ‘dollars’ make sense?: toward a conceptual framework for contingent valuation studies in health care. Med Decis Making 1996; 16: 288–99PubMedCrossRef O’Brien B, Gafni A. When do the ‘dollars’ make sense?: toward a conceptual framework for contingent valuation studies in health care. Med Decis Making 1996; 16: 288–99PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Ortega A, Dranitsaris G, Puodziunas A. What are cancer patients willing to pay for epoetin alia: a cost-benefit analysis. Cancer 1998; 83: 2588–96PubMedCrossRef Ortega A, Dranitsaris G, Puodziunas A. What are cancer patients willing to pay for epoetin alia: a cost-benefit analysis. Cancer 1998; 83: 2588–96PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Dranitsaris G, Leung P, Ciotti R, et al. A multinational study to measure the value that patients with cancer place on improved emesis control following cisplatin chemotherapy. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (9): 955–67PubMedCrossRef Dranitsaris G, Leung P, Ciotti R, et al. A multinational study to measure the value that patients with cancer place on improved emesis control following cisplatin chemotherapy. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (9): 955–67PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Zillich AI, Blumenschein K, Johannesson M, et al. Assessment of the relationship between measures of disease severity, quality oflife, and willingness to pay in asthma. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 (4): 257–65PubMedCrossRef Zillich AI, Blumenschein K, Johannesson M, et al. Assessment of the relationship between measures of disease severity, quality oflife, and willingness to pay in asthma. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 (4): 257–65PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Leung P, Tannock IF, Oza AM, et al. Cost utility analysis of chemotherapy using paclitaxel, docetaxel or vinorelbine for patients with anthracycline-resistant breast cancer. I Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 3082–90 Leung P, Tannock IF, Oza AM, et al. Cost utility analysis of chemotherapy using paclitaxel, docetaxel or vinorelbine for patients with anthracycline-resistant breast cancer. I Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 3082–90
14.
go back to reference Gafni A. Using willingness-to-pay as a measure of benefits: what is the relevant question to ask in the context of public decision making about health care problems? Med Care 1991; 29: 1246–52PubMedCrossRef Gafni A. Using willingness-to-pay as a measure of benefits: what is the relevant question to ask in the context of public decision making about health care problems? Med Care 1991; 29: 1246–52PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Nils-Olov S. An empirical note on willingness to pay and starting point bias. Med Decis Making 1996; 16: 242–7CrossRef Nils-Olov S. An empirical note on willingness to pay and starting point bias. Med Decis Making 1996; 16: 242–7CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Mitchell RC, Carson RT. A contingent valuation estimate of national freshwater benefits: technical report to the US environmental protection agency. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 1984 Mitchell RC, Carson RT. A contingent valuation estimate of national freshwater benefits: technical report to the US environmental protection agency. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 1984
Metadata
Title
Measuring Treatment Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Docetaxel in Advanced Ovarian Cancer
Authors
George Dranitsaris
Julia Elia-Pacitti
Wayne Cottrell
Publication date
01-04-2004
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 6/2004
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422060-00004

Other articles of this Issue 6/2004

PharmacoEconomics 6/2004 Go to the issue

Adis Pharmacoeconomic Drug Evaluation

Repaglinide