Spend less to achieve more: Economic analysis of intermittent versus continuous cetuximab in KRAS wild-type patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Background: In 2014, the COIN-B clinical trial demonstrated that intermittent cetuximab (IC) was a safe alter-native to continuous cetuximab (CC), with less cytotoxic chemotherapy, in first-line treatment for KRAS wild -type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Cetuximab has been available for this indication in England since 2015, but treatment breaks beyond 6 weeks were prohibited, despite real-world evidence that therapy de-escalation maintains equivalent disease control, but with superior Quality-of-Life (QoL). We performed health economic analyses of IC versus CC and used this evidence to help underpin policy change and guide clinical practice through reduction in unnecessary treatment for mCRC patients. Methods: Employing cost-minimization analysis, we conducted partitioned survival modelling (PSM) and Markov Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) simulation to determine costs and quality-adjusted-life-years for IC versus CC. Results: IC reduced costs by pound 35,763 (PSM; p < 0.001) or pound 30,189 (MCMC) per patient annually, while pre-serving treatment efficacy and enhancing QoL. Extrapolating to all mCRC patients eligible for cetuximab therapy would have generated cost savings of ~ pound 1.2 billion over this cohort's lifetime. These data helped underpin a request to NHS England to remove treatment break restrictions in first-line mCRC therapy, which has been adopted as an interim treatment option policy in colorectal cancer during the Covid-19 pandemic. Conclusions: Our results highlight substantial cost savings achievable by treatment de-escalation, while also reinforcing the importance of therapy breaks to potentially increase tumour responsiveness and reduce treatment toxicity. Our study also highlights how health economic evidence can influence health policy, championing reduced treatment intensity approaches without compromising patient outcomes, which is of particular relevance when addressing the reduced capacity and treatment backlogs experienced during the pandemic.

Automated summary

Health economic analyses compared the cost-effectiveness of intermittent and continuous cetuximab for colorectal cancer patients, showing cost savings and improved quality of life with intermittent treatment. These results helped support policy change, reduce unnecessary treatment, and underscored the importance of treatment breaks in reducing treatment toxicity.