To follow the monthly cycles of the model, the average monthly rates of AE for sorafenib and BSC were calculated by dividing the number of events observed by the number of cycles administered. The calculated average monthly (30-day) rates were 0.061

(0.005 standard deviation [SD]) and 0.044 (0.004 SD) for sorafenib and BSC, respectively. The sorafenib mean cost per month ($US4079) was calculated using the cost obtained from Red Book of $US38.27 for one 200-mg tablet22 and the observed average daily dosage of 710.5 mg. In the trial, 54.5% of patients continued to selleck chemicals llc receive sorafenib after progression. As per the decision of the treating investigator, patients were allowed to continue study treatment if it was deemed they were demonstrating clinical benefit. find more In the model, these patients were assumed to continue for a further month after progression. In order to estimate the costs associated with the management of advanced HCC patients and the treatment-related AE in the USA, resource use data were collected using US expert opinion, due to the absence of evidence in the published literature. Given that resource use associated with sorafenib treatment is based on physician insight from recent and ongoing clinical trials, we conducted sensitivity analyses on these parameters. Unit costs were obtained from a variety of published sources.22–25 Unit costs

were all reported in 2007 prices. The resource use estimates and unit costs were used to calculate the total cost of managing advanced HCC patients for each health state in the model (Table 1). Grade 3 and 4 AE costs were also based on the resource use reported by expert opinion and the published unit costs. Using the total aggregated costs and frequency of the appropriate

AE from the SHARP study, a weighted average of the monthly costs of AE for both sorafenib and BSC was calculated (Table 1). The cost of routine follow up before progression was estimated to be the same with both sorafenib and BSC because, with the exception of drugs, the resource use is similar. Patients after progression require more hospitalizations, visits, and tests, and thus the costs are also higher. In order to identify model drivers and examine key areas of uncertainty within the model, one-way deterministic sensitivity Oxymatrine analyses were provided for all major model variables. For the efficacy parameters, 95% confidence intervals were used. The resource use and unit cost data were extensively tested by varying the costs by ± 30 from the mean. Scenario analyses were also performed. The scenarios included setting the discount rates to 0% and 5%, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was presented with the help of the probabilistic mean and SD (Table 2). Results were also shown on a cost-effectiveness plane and in the form of a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve.