Nivolumab + ipilimumab + chemotherapy not cost effective as first-line therapy for NSCLC

2021 ◽  
Vol 880 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-21
2022 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiao Liu ◽  
Zhen Zhou ◽  
Xia Luo ◽  
Lidan Yi ◽  
Liubao Peng ◽  
...  

Objective To compare the cost-effectiveness of the combination of pembrolizumab and chemotherapy (Pembro+Chemo) versus pembrolizumab monotherapy (Pembro) as the first-line treatment for metastatic non-squamous and squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with PD-L1expression ≥50%, respectively, from a US health care perspective.Material and Methods A comprehensive Makrov model were designed to compare the health costs and outcomes associated with first-line Pembro+Chemo and first-line Pembro over a 20-years time horizon. Health states consisted of three main states: progression-free survival (PFS), progressive disease (PD) and death, among which the PFS health state was divided into two substates: PFS while receiving first-line therapy and PFS with discontinued first-line therapy. Two scenario analyses were performed to explore satisfactory long-term survival modeling.Results In base case analysis, for non-squamous NSCLC patients, Pembro+Chemo was associated with a significantly longer life expectancy [3.24 vs 2.16 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and a substantially greater healthcare cost ($341,237 vs $159,055) compared with Pembro, resulting in an ICER of $169,335/QALY; for squamous NSCLC patients, Pembro+Chemo was associated with a slightly extended life expectancy of 0.22 QALYs and a marginal incremental cost of $3,449 compared with Pembro, resulting in an ICER of $15,613/QALY. Our results were particularly sensitive to parameters that determine QALYs. The first scenario analysis yielded lower ICERs than our base case results. The second scenario analysis founded Pembro+Chemo was dominated by Pembro.Conclusion For metastatic non-squamous NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%, first-line Pembro+Chemo was not cost-effective when compared with first-line Pembro. In contrast, for the squamous NSCLC patient population, our results supported the first-line Pembro+Chemo as a cost-effective treatment. Although there are multiple approaches that are used for extrapolating long-term survival, the optimal method has yet to be determined.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 5034-5034
Author(s):  
Francesca Pierdomenico ◽  
Antonio Almeida

Abstract Abstract 5034 Background: Azacitidine is a hypomethylating agent indicated for treatment of higher risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS). A recently published phase III trial demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) of MDS patients treated with Azacitidine compared to those receiving conventional care regimens, thus establishing this treatment option as first line therapy in those patients for whom bone marrow transplantation is not an option. Standard regime has been 75 mg /m2/day during 7 days; however several other treatment schedules have been explored that may have equal efficacy and tolerability though being more cost-effective. Aims: Evaluate the efficacy of Azacitidine regimen in terms of transfusion independence (TI), overall response (OR), AML transformation and tolerability in patients with higher risk MDS and AML with dysplasia. Methods: Higher risk (IPSS INT-2 and high risk) MDS patients were treated at a single institution with Azacitidine with a dosing regime of 500 mg/m2 every 4 weeks administered over 5 days. The total dose was adjusted so that entire vials were used. OR, including complete response (CR), haematological response (HR) and partial response (PR) and TI, defined according to the 2000 International Working Group Criteria (IWG), were assessed by blood and bone marrow examination. Treatment cycles were repeated until toxicity or disease progression. Results: A total of 38 patients were treated with Azacitidine between January 2007 and December 2010. Mean age was 68 years old (range 85–33) and male sex was predominant (M:F of 1.5) Fifteen patients had refractory anaemia with excess blasts, eleven had AML with dysplasia, five had chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia, tree had refractory cytopenias with multilineage dysplasia and four had acute erythroblastic leukemia. Most patients were high risk according to IPSS scoring (82%). Azacytidine was used as first line therapy in 32% and as second line in 61%. An average of 5 cycles (1–22) per patient were administered. The TI rate was of 45%, with average response duration of 6.5 months. OR rate was of 32% (9 CR, 1 HR and 2 PR). Twenty-two patients died during the follow-up period. Six patients progressed to AML: five of them had never shown any response to Azacitidine, while the other one had obtained TI. Median survival from diagnosis was of 22 months, while median survival from beginning of treatment was of 12 months. Tolerability was good, mainly grades I and II gastrointestinal and skin toxicity. Eleven patients (26%) had Grade III haematological toxicity and four (11%) suffered Grade IV haematological toxicity. The Azacitidine schedule using 500 mg/m2/4 weeks with the total dose adjusted across the 5 days in order to avoid wastage, instead of 75 mg/m2/day during 7 days, allowed for significant costs reductions. Conclusion: The efficacy of Azacitidine in achieving TI and prolonging survival in MDS is well recognized. In this study, Azacitidine improved quality of life and overall survival regardless of the quality of response. Treatment was well tolerated, with limited toxicity. Our results, though coming from a small group of patients, were comparable to what reported in the literature in terms of efficacy and tolerability, and we showed that it is cost effective to use our schedule regime. Disclosures: Almeida: Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau.


2021 ◽  
pp. 030089162098530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying-hui Tong ◽  
Hai-ying Ding ◽  
Wen-xiu Xin ◽  
Li-ke Zhong ◽  
Gao-qi Xu ◽  
...  

Introduction: Results from the CASPIAN trial (Durvalumab ± Tremelimumab in Combination With Platinum Based Chemotherapy in Untreated Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer) trial demonstrated the clinical benefit of durvalumab plus etoposide–platinum (EP) chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with extensive stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, considering the high price of durvalumab, it is unclear whether addition of durvalumab to EP chemotherapy has economic value compared with EP alone. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab plus EP chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with ES-SCLC. Methods: A Markov model comprising three health states (stable, progressive, and dead) was developed to simulate the process of small-cell lung cancer. Utility and costs were obtained from published resources. Health outcomes were derived from the CASPIAN trial. Costs were calculated based on the standard medical fees in Zhejiang Province from Chinese patients’ perspective. Utility values were obtained from published data. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were applied to verify model robustness. Results The addition of durvalumab to EP chemotherapy costs more than $32,220, with a gain of 0.14 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with EP alone. The incremental cost-effective ratio was $230,142.9 per QALY, which exceeds the willingness to pay threshold of $28,527 per QALY. In the sensitivity analysis, the utility values for the progressive state, costs of durvalumab and EP chemotherapy, and costs for the progressive state were considered to be the three most sensitive factors in the model. Conclusion: The addition of durvalumab to EP chemotherapy is not a cost-effective strategy in the first-line therapy of ES-SCLC from the Chinese payers’ perspective.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (15) ◽  
pp. 1946-1956 ◽  
Author(s):  
James I. Barnes ◽  
Vasu Divi ◽  
Adrian Begaye ◽  
Russell Wong ◽  
Steven Coutre ◽  
...  

Key Points At current prices, ibrutinib is not a cost-effective initial CLL therapy in older patients without 17p deletion. The cost of ibrutinib would need to be <$6800 per month to be cost-effective.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19392-e19392
Author(s):  
Divya Ahuja Parikh ◽  
Paul Irvin Serrato ◽  
Sandy Srinivas ◽  
Tess Sophie Ryckman ◽  
Joshua Salomon ◽  
...  

e19392 Background: The treatment landscape for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has transformed in the past two years. Both Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab and Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib are approved regimens for first-line treatment of intermediate to poor-risk patients with advanced RCC. The choice between these immunotherapy-based combinations for first-line therapy is highly debated; no prior study has evaluated the cost-effectiveness of both combinations compared to Sunitinib. Methods: We used a decision analytic Markov model informed by the recent Checkmate-214 and Keynote-426 phase 3 randomized controlled clinical trials to evaluate costs and effectiveness of Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab, Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib, and Sunitinib in the first-line treatment of advanced RCC from a US health payer perspective. We used the model to extrapolate survival beyond the closure of the trials and examined the robustness of our findings with sensitivity analyses. Main outcomes were life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, all discounted at 3% annually. Results: Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab increased life expectancy by 0.58 years at cost of approximately $190,000 per QALY gained compared to Sunitinib. Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib increased life expectancy by 0.39 years at a cost of approximately $861,000 per QALY gained compared to Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab. The results were not sensitive to reasonable changes in drug costs and quality of life estimates. Both combinations cost more than the traditional willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of $150,000 per QALY gained. A 20% price reduction is required for Nivolumab and Ipilimumab to be cost-effective and a 48% price reduction is required for Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib to be cost-effective. Conclusions: Both Nivolumab plus Ipilumumab and Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib provide increased longevity and reduced morbidity relative to Sunitinib. However, the prolonged duration of treatment and doublet-drug pricing results in high-costs. Price reductions are required for both of the immunotherapy-based combinations to be cost-effective. [Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document