Potential cost savings of oral versus intravenous etoposide in the treatment of small cell lung cancer.
An economic analysis was conducted on a randomised multicentre study comparing the use of intravenous (IV) etoposide versus oral etoposide treatment regimens in patients with small cell lung cancer.  41 patients received cisplatin 100 mg/m 2 intravenously (IV) on study day 1 and etoposide 120 mg/m 2 IV on study days 1, 2, and 3 (IV regimen); and 42 patients received cisplatin 100 mg/m 2 IV and etoposide 120 mg/m 2 IV on study day 1 and 240 mg/m 2 orally (equivalent to 120 mg/m 2 IV) on study days 2 and 3 (oral regimen).  The results of the study from which these data were extracted showed equal efficacy between groups.  Based on a retrospective review of resource use in the clinical trial, patient healthcare costs were examined in the following areas:  antineoplastic drugs, IV fluids, supplies used for chemotherapy administration, and chemotherapy administration procedure fees.  The total cost per course of therapy was $US2002 for the IV regimen and $US1653 for the oral regimen.  This represented a 17% savings for patients receiving the oral regimen.
Pashko
S
S
Center for Economic Studies in Medicine, a Division of Pracon Consulting Services, Reston, Virginia.
Johnson
D H
DH
D000284:Administration, Oral; D018288:Carcinoma, Small Cell / Q000188:drug therapy*; D002945:Cisplatin; D017046:Cost Savings; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D005047:Etoposide / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics*; D017048:Health Care Costs; D006801:Humans; D007262:Infusions, Intravenous / Q000191:economics; D008175:Lung Neoplasms / Q000188:drug therapy*