Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Volume 2014, Article ID 481071, 14 pages
Research Article

Cost-Effectiveness of Pazopanib in Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma in the United Kingdom

1Policy Analysis Inc. (PAI), Four Davis Court, Brookline, MA 02445, USA
2GlaxoSmithKline, Stockley Park West, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB11 1BT, UK
3GlaxoSmithKline, 7333 Mississauga Road, Mississauga, ON, Canada L5N 6L4
4University of Toronto, 144 College Street, Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 3M2
5York Health Economics Consortium, Level 2, Market Square, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5NH, UK

Received 20 December 2013; Accepted 3 April 2014; Published 12 June 2014

Academic Editor: Antoine Italiano

Copyright © 2014 Jordan Amdahl et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


In the phase III PALETTE trial, pazopanib improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in patients with advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (mSTS) who had received prior chemotherapy. We used a multistate model to estimate expected PFS, overall survival (OS), lifetime STS treatment costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for patients receiving pazopanib, placebo, trabectedin, ifosfamide, or gemcitabine plus docetaxel as second-line mSTS therapies. The cost-effectiveness of pazopanib was expressed as the incremental costs per QALY gained. Estimates of PFS/OS, adverse events, and utilities for pazopanib and placebo were from the PALETTE trial. Estimates of relative effectiveness of the other comparators were from an unadjusted indirect comparison versus pazopanib. Costs were from published sources. Pazopanib is estimated to increase QALYs by 0.128 and costs by £7,976 versus placebo; cost per QALY gained with pazopanib versus placebo is estimated to be £62,000. Compared with the other chemotherapies, pazopanib provides similar QALYs at a lower cost. Pazopanib may not be cost-effective versus placebo but may be cost-effective versus the most commonly used active treatments, although this conclusion is uncertain. Given the unmet need for effective treatments for mSTS, pazopanib may be an appropriate alternative to some currently used medications in the United Kingdom.