2种非小细胞肺癌化疗止吐方案的成本效果分析  

Cost-effectiveness analysis of two antiemetic regimens added onto chemotherapies against non-small cell lung cancer

作　　者：杨忠英[1] 程华丰[1] 丁罡[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海市仁济医院崇明分院,上海202150

出　　处：《中国新药杂志》2006年第10期828-829,共2页Chinese Journal of New Drugs

摘　　要：目的:探讨2种药物化疗止吐方案对非小细胞肺癌化疗所致呕吐的药物经济分析。方法:运用药物经济学成本-效果分析法,对于40例长春瑞滨+顺铂(NP)化疗方案患者,采用自身对照法,方案A在第1次化疗前给予盐酸甲氧氯普胺注射液20 mg,方案B在第2次化疗前给予盐酸格拉司琼氯化钠注射液3 mg进行预防呕吐。结果:2个方案预防呕吐的成本分别为64．51元和269．19元;有效率分别为30%和80%;从成本-效果比(C/E)分析,2种方案所需花费的成本分别为2．15元和3．36元;从增长的成本-效果比(ΔC/ΔE)分析,在方案A的效果基础上再获得1个单位效果,方案B所花费的成本仅为4．09元。结论:方案B是预防化疗所致呕吐方案中较为合理的方案。Objective： To evaluate the pharmacoeconomic outcomes of two antiemetie schemes in the adjunctive chemotherapy against small cell lung cancer. Methods： 40 patients receiving cisplatin chemotherapy were injected with metoclopramide 20 mg before the first cycle of chemotherapy （ scheme A）, or injected with granisetron 3 mg before the. second cycle of chemotherapy （ scheme B）. The antiemetic cost-effectiveness （C/E） was analyzed by self-comparison. Results： The cost of two schemes was ￥64.51 and ￥ 269.19,respectively. The effectiveness rate of two schemes was 30% and 80% , respectively. Based on the C/E analysis, two schemes costed ￥2. 15 and ￥3.36, respectively. Based on the AC/AE analysis, i. e. , an increase of effectiveness rate up to 1% in the base of the scheme A, the scheme B costed ￥ 4. 09. Conclusion： The scheme B was more optimal than the scheme A in the antiemetic cost-effectivenss outcomes for chemotherapy against small cell lung carcinoma.

关 键 词：成本-效果分析 非小细胞肺癌 盐酸甲氧氯普胺注射液 盐酸格拉司琼氯化钠注射液 

分 类 号：R975.4[医药卫生—药品]