3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Molecular biomarkers and precision medicine in colorectal cancer: a systematic review of health economic analyses

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          An increased understanding of the biology of colorectal cancer (CRC) has fuelled identification of biomarkers with potential to drive a stratified precision medicine care approach in this common malignancy.

          We conducted a systematic review of health economic assessments of molecular biomarkers (MBMs) and their employment in patient stratification in CRC. Our analysis revealed scenarios where health economic analyses have been applied to evaluate the cost effectiveness of MBM-guided clinical interventions: (i) evaluation of Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene (DPYD) status to identify patients susceptible to 5-Fluouracil toxicity; (ii) determination of Uridine 5′-diphospho- glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A1 gene (UGT1A1) polymorphism status to help guide irinotecan treatment; (iii) assessment of RAS/RAF mutational status to stratify patients for chemotherapy or Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) therapy and (iv) multigene expression analysis (Oncotype Dx) to identify and spare non-responders the debilitating effects of particular chemotherapy interventions.

          Our findings indicate that Oncotype Dx is cost-effective in high income settings within specific price points, by limiting treatment toxicity in CRC patients. DPYD status testing may also be cost effective in certain settings to avoid specific 5-FU toxicities post treatment. In contrast, current research does not support UGT1A1 polymorphism status as a cost-effective guide to irinotecan dosing, while the health economic evidence to support testing of KRAS/NRAS mutational status and chemo/EGFR therapy choice was inconclusive, despite its widespread adoption in CRC treatment management. However, we also show that there is a paucity of high-quality cost-effectiveness studies to support clinical application of precision medicine approaches in CRC.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Extended RAS mutations and anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody survival benefit in metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

          Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) prolong survival in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene (KRAS) exon 2 wild-type tumors. Recent evidence has suggested that other RAS mutations (in exons 3 and 4 of KRAS and exons 2, 3 and 4 of a related gene, NRAS) may also be predictive of resistance.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement

            Economic evaluations of health interventions pose a particular challenge for reporting. There is also a need to consolidate and update existing guidelines and promote their use in a user friendly manner. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement is an attempt to consolidate and update previous health economic evaluation guidelines efforts into one current, useful reporting guidance. The primary audiences for the CHEERS statement are researchers reporting economic evaluations and the editors and peer reviewers assessing them for publication. The need for new reporting guidance was identified by a survey of medical editors. A list of possible items based on a systematic review was created. A two round, modified Delphi panel consisting of representatives from academia, clinical practice, industry, government, and the editorial community was conducted. Out of 44 candidate items, 24 items and accompanying recommendations were developed. The recommendations are contained in a user friendly, 24 item checklist. A copy of the statement, accompanying checklist, and this report can be found on the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluations Publication Guidelines Task Force website (http://www.ispor.org/TaskForces/EconomicPubGuidelines.asp). We hope CHEERS will lead to better reporting, and ultimately, better health decisions. To facilitate dissemination and uptake, the CHEERS statement is being co-published across 10 health economics and medical journals. We encourage other journals and groups, to endorse CHEERS. The author team plans to review the checklist for an update in five years.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pharmacokinetically guided dose adjustment of 5-fluorouracil: a rational approach to improving therapeutic outcomes.

              Chemotherapy dosing of the fluoropyrimidine 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is currently based on body surface area. However, body surface area-based dosing has been associated with clinically significant pharmacokinetic variability, and as such, dosing based on body surface area may be of limited use. The clinical activity of 5-FU is modest at standard doses, and in general, dosing is limited by the safety profile, with myelosuppression and gastrointestinal toxicity being the most commonly observed side effects. Various strategies have been developed to enhance the clinical activity of 5-FU, such as biochemical modulation, alterations in scheduling of administration, and the use of oral chemotherapy. Studies that have shown an association between plasma concentration with toxicity and clinical efficacy have shown that pharmacokinetically guided dose adjustments can substantially improve the therapeutic index of 5-FU treatment. These studies have shown that only 20%-30% of patients treated with a 5-FU-based regimen have 5-FU levels that are in the appropriate therapeutic range--approximately 40%-60% of patients are underdosed and 10%-20% of patients are overdosed. To date, 5-FU drug testing has not been widely used because of the lack of a simple, fast, and inexpensive method. Recent advances in testing based on liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy and a nanoparticle antibody-based immunoassay for 5-FU may now allow for routine monitoring of 5-FU in clinical practice. We review the data on pharmacokinetically guided dose adjustment of 5-FU and discuss the potential of this approach to advance therapeutic outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Oncotarget
                Oncotarget
                Oncotarget
                ImpactJ
                Oncotarget
                Impact Journals LLC
                1949-2553
                21 May 2019
                21 May 2019
                : 10
                : 36
                : 3408-3423
                Affiliations
                1 Centre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
                2 Queen’s Management School, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
                3 Institute of Cancer Policy, King's College London and King’s Health Partners Comprehensive Cancer Centre, London, United Kingdom
                4 CRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
                5 Centre for Public Health, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Raymond Henderson, rhenderson13@ 123456qub.ac.uk
                Article
                26909
                10.18632/oncotarget.26909
                6534362
                31164962
                6c6cad95-5345-429b-ac6f-9e4da7f1e7ec
                Copyright: © 2019 Henderson et al.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 (CC BY 3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 25 March 2019
                : 21 April 2019
                Categories
                Review

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                economic analysis,precision medicine,colorectal cancer,biomarker,kras
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                economic analysis, precision medicine, colorectal cancer, biomarker, kras

                Comments

                Comment on this article