Purpose: First-line treatment with monoclonal antibodies (bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab) for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has advanced. The costs of drugs targeted to mCRC are high. This systematic review aimed to summarize the cost-effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies in the first-line treatment of RAS wild-type mCRC.
Methods: We searched 5 databases to find original-research cost-effectiveness analyses of monoclonal antibodies used in the first-line treatment of patients with RAS wild-type mCRC. Three reviewers independently evaluated all of the records to be screened.
Findings: A total of 15 articles, 12 cost-effectiveness analyses, and 3 cost-utility analyses were identified. The reporting of identified articles was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 checklist. They were assigned to 1 of 6 categories based on the combination of the intervention and control groups, the most common of which was cetuximab + chemotherapy versus bevacizumab + chemotherapy. The results of the cost-effectiveness analyses may have varied because of the differences in settings, such as country, study population, RAS mutation status, efficacy data, and model structure, in which each study was conducted.
Implications: Although treatment with monoclonal antibodies has demonstrated efficacy in terms of life-years gained and progression-free survival, the most cost-effective treatment among monoclonal antibodies remains controversial; however, most of the studies that compared a monoclonal antibody + chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone reported that chemotherapy alone was a cost-effective strategy. Future studies are needed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating patients with mCRC using biomarker-driven precision medicine.
Keywords: RAS wild-type; cost-effectiveness; metastatic colorectal cancer; monoclonal antibody; systematic review.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.