title: Cetuximab for recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a NICE single technology appraisal.
abstract: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of cetuximab (Merck Serono) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of cetuximab in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy (CTX) for the treatment of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell cancer of the head and neck (SCCHN) according to the Institute's Single Technology Appraisal (STA) process. The Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group at the University of Liverpool was commissioned to act as the Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article summarizes the ERG's review of the evidence submitted by the manufacturer. A summary of the Appraisal Committee (AC) decision is provided. The ERG reviewed the clinical evidence in accordance with the decision problem defined by NICE. The analysis of the submitted model assessed the appropriateness of the manufacturer's approach to modelling the decision problem, the reliability of model implementation and the extent of conformity to published standards and prevailing norms of practice within the health economics modelling community. Particular attention was paid to issues likely to impact substantially on the base-case cost-effectiveness results. Clinical-effectiveness evidence was derived from a single randomized controlled trial (RCT). Results presented for clinical outcomes were strongly supportive of benefits resulting from the use of cetuximab. Cetuximab + platinum-based CTX with 5 fluorouracil (5-FU) extended median overall survival (OS) from 7.4 months in the CTX group to 10.1 months in the cetuximab + CTX group. Median progression-free survival rose from 3.3 months to 5.6 months, best overall response to therapy increased from 19.5% to 35.6%, disease control rate rose from 60% to 81.1% and median time to treatment failure was 4.8 months compared with 3.0 months. Exploratory subgroup analyses indicated significant OS benefits in 11 of 16 pre-planned analyses. The ERG identified a number of issues relating to the clinical-effectiveness results: consideration was limited to first-line use of cetuximab; patients in the trial were younger and fitter than those presenting in UK clinical practice; there was no evidence of survival advantage for patients with metastatic disease; there was no evidence of effectiveness in patients not cetuximab-naive; and the quality-of-life data were poor. The submitted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was considerably above the NICE threshold. The ERG questioned the submitted economic model on a number of grounds: the rationale for creating an economic model rather than direct analysis of trial data; the use of Weibull functions for survival models; inaccurate CTX costs; selection of health state utilities; inaccurate unit costs; and lack of mid-cycle correction. After amending the model, the ERG considered the use of cetuximab to be not cost effective for NICE at any price. The AC concluded that cetuximab in combination with platinum-based CTX should not be recommended for the treatment of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic SCCHN. Patients already receiving this treatment for this indication should have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinician consider it appropriate to stop. This was the first appraisal to consider the end-of-life medicines criteria introduced by NICE in January 2009.
authors.affiliation: Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3GB, UK.
authors.forename: Adrian
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Bagust
authors.forename: Janette
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Greenhalgh
authors.forename: Angela
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Boland
authors.forename: Nigel
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Fleeman
authors.forename: Claire
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: McLeod
authors.forename: Rumona
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Dickson
authors.forename: Yenal
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Dundar
authors.forename: Christine
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Proudlove
authors.forename: Richard
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Shaw
mesh_terms: D000911:Antibodies, Monoclonal; D061067:Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; D000971:Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D016190:Carboplatin; D002294:Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000191:economics; D000068818:Cetuximab; D002945:Cisplatin; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D017723:Drug Utilization Review / Q000379:methods*; D006258:Head and Neck Neoplasms / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000191:economics; D017048:Health Care Costs / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006801:Humans; D009362:Neoplasm Metastasis / Q000188:drug therapy*; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D012008:Recurrence
chemical_list: D000911:Antibodies, Monoclonal; D061067:Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; D016190:Carboplatin; D000068818:Cetuximab; D002945:Cisplatin
references.citation: Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2005 Jan;24(1):9-17
references.pmid: 15785869
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2008 Sep 11;359(11):1116-27
references.pmid: 18784101
references.citation: PLoS One. 2010 Jan 28;5(1):e8933
references.pmid: 20126669