Dataset Information

First-line treatment with durvalumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer in the USA: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the perspective of the US payer.

Methods

Based on the POSEIDON clinical trial, a partition survival model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for the first-line treatment of metastatic NSCLC. The model's primary outcomes were costs, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The analysis only considered direct medical costs, and health utility value was determined using published literature. The robustness of the model was tested by probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

The combination therapy of durvalumab and chemotherapy improved survival by 0.713 QALYs at an incremental cost of $64 104.638 compared with chemotherapy alone, resulting in an ICER of $89 908.328 per QALY gained from the US payer perspective. The combination therapy had a 92.3% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per QALY based on incremental net health benefits. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the model's consistency, and none of the parameters significantly influenced the findings.

Conclusion

Durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy represents a more cost-effective strategy for first-line therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC in the USA compared with chemotherapy alone.

SUBMITTER: Zheng Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10729208 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

First-line treatment with durvalumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer in the USA: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Zheng Zhiwei Z Fang Ling L Cai Hongfu H

BMJ open 20231214 12

<h4>Objective</h4>The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the perspective of the US payer.<h4>Methods</h4>Based on the POSEIDON clinical trial, a partition survival model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for the first-line treat ...[more]

PMID: 38101853

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance: In the open-label phase III POSEIDON randomized clinical trial (RCT), a limited course of tremelimumab plus durvalumab and chemotherapy (T + D + CT) indicated in the first-line treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were substantially improved without significant additional tolerance burden compared to chemotherapy (CT). However, given the high cost of T + D + CT, its value needs to be evaluated in terms of both potency and cost. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of T + D + CT versus CT in individuals with previously untreated mNSCLC from a U.S. payer perspective. Design, setting, and participants: A three-state Markov model was adopted to weigh the lifetime costs and effectiveness of T + D + CT versus CT for the treatment of first-line mNSCLC, according to the results of the POSEIDON phase III RCT involving 675 individuals with mNSCLC. Individuals were simulated to undergo either T + D + CT for up to four 21-day cycles, followed by durvalumab once every 4 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects and one additional tremelimumab dose, or CT for up to six 21-day cycles (with or without pemetrexed maintenance; all groups) in the analysis. Main outcomes and measures: Lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were evaluated with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $ 100,000 to $ 150,000 per QALY. The uncertainty of the model was investigated using univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: T + D + CT produced additional 0.36 QALYs with additional costs of $ 217,694, compared to CT, giving rise to ICERs of $ 608,667.86/QALY. The univariate sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the outcomes were most sensitive to the cost of durvalumab. Other variables with a large or moderate influence were the utility of progression-free survival state, utility of progressive disease state, and cost of tremelimumab. Probability sensitivity analysis revealed that T + D + CT had a 0% probability of cost-effectiveness in individuals with mNSCLC at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $ 100,000 to $ 150,000 per QALY. Conclusion and relevance: In this model, T + D + CT was estimated to be less cost-effective than CT for patients with mNSCLC at a WTP threshold of $ 100,000 to $ 150,000 per QALY in the United States. When new combination therapies with remarkable effect become pivotal in the first-line treatment, the price reduction of durvalumab and tremelimumab may be necessary to achieve cost-effectiveness in future possible context.

Project description:BackgroundSintilimab plus chemotherapy significantly prolongs overall survival (OS) for patients with advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). However, the cost-effectiveness of this high-priced therapy is currently unknown. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of sintilimab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone as fist-line therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic OSCC from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system.MethodsA partitioned survival model consisting of 3 discrete health states was constructed to assess the cost and effectiveness of sintilimab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy as first-line treatment of OSCC. Key clinical data in the model came from the ORIENT-15 trial. Costs and utilities were collected from published sources. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefits (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB) were calculated for the two treatment strategies. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to account for uncertainty and model stability. Additional subgroup and scenario analyses were performed.ResultsTreatment with sintilimab plus chemotherapy provided an additional 0.37 QALYs and an incremental cost of $8,046.58 compared with chemotherapy, which resulted in an ICER of $21,782.24 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the model was most sensitive to utility of progression-free survival (PFS) and the cost of sintilimab. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that the probability of sintilimab plus chemotherapy being cost-effective was 0.01%, 76.80% and 98.60% at the threshold of 1, 2 or 3 times GDP per capita per QALY, respectively. Subgroup analysis found that all subgroups other than PD-L1 expression combined positive scores < 1 subgroup favored sintilimab plus chemotherapy treatment due to its association with positive INHBs by varying the hazard ratios for OS and PFS. The scenario analyses showed altering the time horizon of the model or fitting survival curves separately did not reverse results of the model.ConclusionSintilimab plus chemotherapy was associated with improved QALYs and an additional cost but was estimated to be cost-effective compared with chemotherapy alone as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic OSCC at the commonly adopted willingness-to-pay threshold of 3 times GDP per capita per QALY in China.

Project description:BackgroundThe Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) has recommended sintilimab plus chemotherapy (SINT + Chemo) as a standard first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC), based on the proven effectiveness and safety in the ORINT-16 trail. Its cost-effectiveness, however, remains to be evaluated.MethodsWe established a partitioned survival approach (PartSA) model with a 10-year time horizon to determine whether SINT + Chemo (vs. chemotherapy) was more cost-effective as a first-line treatment for unresectable advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC. Survival data was generated from the ORIENT-16 trail. Cost calculation was limited to direct medical costs. Database of Hunan Public Resources Trading Service Platform was used as the source for obtaining drug prices. Other cost and utility values were gathered from established literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was the primary output. Additionally, we conducted sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and scenario analysis.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, group SINT + Chemo showed an increase in utility value by 0.32 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an extra cost of $7988.43, resulting in an ICER of $25239.29/QALY, below the Chinese cost-effective willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $38223.34. Upon further subgroup analysis according to patients' programmed death 1 ligand (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS), the ICERs were $26341.01/QALY for patients highly expressing PD-L1 (CPS ≥5) and $17658.26/QALY for patients lowly expressing PD-L1 (CPS <5). Based on the sensitivity analysis, we found the PFS utility was the parameter that had the most significant impact on the model's outcomes. Moreover, in scenario analysis, the results remained consistent despite variations in the model's time frame.ConclusionIn China, SINT + Chemo is a more cost-effective option (vs. chemotherapy) as a first-line therapy for unresectable advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC, irrespective of PD-L1 expression levels.

Project description:BackgroundWhile the tremelimumab plus durvalumab combined with chemotherapy (T + D + CT) has shown promise in treating epidermal growth factor receptor/anaplastic lymphoma kinase (EGFR/ALK) wild-type metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), particularly in patients with low or no programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, the economic implications of its high cost remain poorly understood. This study fills a critical gap in knowledge by evaluating the cost-effectiveness of T + D + CT from a US health care perspective, offering valuable insights for clinical and policy decision-making.MethodsA 10-year Markov model was crafted to track the disease progression, survival, and treatment-related toxicities of a patient cohort with EGFR/ALK wild-type mNSCLC. Transition probabilities were derived from the POSEIDON trial, while health state utilities were obtained from the literature. Cost data, including drug acquisition and administration, subsequent anticancer therapies, and adverse event management were estimated using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project databases, with additional costs sourced from current literature. All cost and effectiveness measures were discounted at an annual rate of 3%. The model's robustness was assessed through deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA), probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), and scenario analysis.ResultsT + D + CT compared to chemotherapy alone yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of $370,208 to $691,960 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, exceeding the standard willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 to $150,000 per QALY. Against durvalumab plus chemotherapy, T + D + CT was only cost-effective in all subgroups. DSA results for patients with PD-L1 expression <1% showed that the ICER for first-line T + D + CT remained above the WTP threshold range, even with substantial changes to model inputs. PSA revealed a higher likelihood of T + D + CT being cost-effective as WTP thresholds increased. Scenario analysis confirmed the study's primary findings, with the exception of a scenario where durvalumab was offered at no cost.ConclusionsThe findings suggests that T + D + CT may not be a cost-effectiveness first-line treatment for EGFR/ALK wild-type mNSCLC in the US, given its high ICERs and limited cost-effectiveness in the majority of PD-L1 expression subgroups.

Dataset Information

First-line treatment with durvalumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer in the USA: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

First-line treatment with durvalumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer in the USA: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets