Publications

Detailed Information

Erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national database

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorShin, Sangjin-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Chan Mi-
dc.contributor.authorKwon, Hanbyeol-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Kyung-Hun-
dc.date.accessioned2017-02-08T04:15:48Z-
dc.date.available2017-02-08T04:15:48Z-
dc.date.issued2016-07-11-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Cancer, 16(1):443ko_KR
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/100537-
dc.descriptionThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.ko_KR
dc.description.abstractBackground
A randomized clinical trial has found that the addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine (GEM-E) for pancreatic cancer led to a modest increase in survival. The aim of this national population-based retrospective study was to compare the effectiveness of GEM-E to GEM alone for pancreatic cancer patients in real clinical practice.

Methods
Patients with pancreatic cancer (ICD-10: C25) with prescription claims of gemcitabine or erlotinib between Jan 1, 2007 and Dec 31, 2012 were retrospectively identified from the Korean Health Insurance claims database. To be included in the study population, patients were required to have had a histological or cytological diagnosis within one year before chemotherapy. Patients treated with prior radiotherapy, surgery, or chemotherapy were excluded to reduce heterogeneity. Overall survival from the initiation of therapy and the medical costs of GEM-E and GEM were compared.

Results
A total of 4,267 patients were included in the analysis. Overall survival was not significantly longer in patients treated with GEM-E (median 6.77 months for GEM-E vs. 6.68 months for GEM, p = 0.0977). There was also no significant difference in the respective one-year survival rates (27.0 % vs. 27.3 %; p = 0.5988). Multivariate analysis using age, gender, and comorbidities as covariates did not reveal any significant differences in survival. Based on this relative effectiveness, the incremental cost per life year gained over GEM was estimated at USD 70,843.64 for GEM-E.

Conclusions
GEM-E for pancreatic cancer is not more effective than GEM in a real-world setting, and it does not provide reasonable cost-effectiveness over GEM.
ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherBioMed Centralko_KR
dc.subjectPancreatic cancerko_KR
dc.subjectGemcitabineko_KR
dc.subjectErlotinibko_KR
dc.subjectComparative effectiveness researchko_KR
dc.subjectNational databaseko_KR
dc.titleErlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for pancreatic cancer: real-world analysis of Korean national databaseko_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor신상진-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor박찬미-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor권한별-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor이경훈-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12885-016-2482-z-
dc.language.rfc3066en-
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s).-
dc.date.updated2017-01-06T10:13:57Z-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share