e18338 Background: In recent years, new drugs have been introduced to the second line setting of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Nivolumab increases overall survival and is associated with less toxicity compared to everolimus in this setting based on the Checkmate 025 study. However, due to nivolumab's high cost there is a need to define its value by considering both efficacy and cost. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab for the second-line treatment of advanced RCC from the US payer perspective. Methods: A Markov model was developed to compare the costs and effectiveness of nivolumab with those of everolimus or placebo in the second-line treatment of advanced RCC. Health outcomes were measured in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Drug costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates in 2016. Model robustness was addressed in univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. We addressed the controversial issue of the extensive duration of immunotherapy treatment amongst long term survivors, which may or may not be approved by payers. Results: The total mean cost per-patient of nivolumab versus everolimus was $101,070 and $50,935, respectfully. Nivolumab generated a gain of 0.24 LYs (0.34 QALYs) over everolimus and 0.89 LYs (0.96 QALYs) over placebo. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for nivolumab was $146,532/QALY versus everolimus and $105,232/QALY versus placebo. Limiting the maximal treatment duration of nivolumab to two years lowered the ICER to $121,788/QALY versus everolimus and $96,418/QALY versus placebo. Conclusions: Our analysis established an ICER of $146,532/QALY for nivolumab versus everolimus in second-line advanced RCC treatment.
Pazopanib together with 6–8 cycles of sintilimab followed by single use of pazopanib in the second-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma