Dataset Information

Cost effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been rapidly evolving. ICIs are likely to be more effective but also lead to escalating healthcare costs. OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS:We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for studies comparing the cost effectiveness of ICIs for NSCLC. Potential studies identified were independently checked for eligibility by two authors, with disagreement resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of the included studies was evaluated using Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklists. RESULTS:A total of 22 economic studies were included. Overall reporting of the identified studies largely met CHEERS recommendations. In the first-line setting, for advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 ? 50%, pembrolizumab appeared cost-effective compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in the US and Hong Kong (China), but not in the UK and China. The cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of NSCLC in PD-L1 ? 1% patients remained obscure. Regardless of PD-L1 expression status, pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy could be a cost-effective first-line therapy in the US. On the contrary, addition of atezolizumab to the combination of bevacizumab and chemotherapy was not cost-effective for patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC from the US payer perspective. In the second-line setting compared with docetaxel, pembrolizumab was cost-effective; though nivolumab was not cost-effective in the base case, it could be by increased PD-L1 threshold. Results of the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab second-line treatment remained inconsistent. In addition, the adoption of durvalumab consolidation therapy after chemoradiotherapy could be cost-effective versus no consolidation therapy for patients with stage III NSCLC. CONCLUSIONS:Immunotherapy can be a cost-effective option for treatment of NSCLC in several scenarios. A discount of the agents or the use of PD-L1 expression as a biomarker improves the cost-effectiveness of immunotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Ding H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7467260 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review.

Ding Haiying H Xin Wenxiu W Tong Yinghui Y Sun Jiao J Xu Gaoqi G Ye Ziqi Z Rao Yuefeng Y

PloS one 20200902 9

<h4>Background</h4>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been rapidly evolving. ICIs are likely to be more effective but also lead to escalating healthcare costs.<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).<h4>Methods</h4>We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for studies comparing the cost effe ...[more]

PMID: 32877435

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Escalating healthcare costs are necessitating the practice of value-based oncology. It is crucial to critically evaluate the economic impact of influential but expensive therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). To date, no systematic assessment of the cost-effectiveness (CE) of ICIs has been performed. METHODS:PRISMA-guided systematic searches of the PubMed database were conducted. Studies of head/neck (n?=?3), lung (n?=?5), genitourinary (n?=?4), and melanoma (n?=?8) malignancies treated with ICIs were evaluated. The reference willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was $100,000/QALY. RESULTS:Nivolumab was not cost-effective over chemotherapy for recurrent/metastatic head/neck cancers (HNCs). For non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), nivolumab was not cost-effective for a general cohort, but increased PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in CE. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for both previously treated and newly-diagnosed metastatic NSCLC. For genitourinary cancers (GUCs, renal cell and bladder cancers), nivolumab and pembrolizumab were not cost-effective options. Regarding metastatic/unresected melanoma, ipilimumab monotherapy is less cost-effective than nivolumab, nivolumab/ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab. The addition of ipilimumab to nivolumab monotherapy was not adequately cost-effective. Pembrolizumab or nivolumab monotherapy offered comparable CE profiles. CONCLUSIONS:With limited data and from the reference WTP, nivolumab was not cost-effective for HNCs. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for NSCLC; although not the case for nivolumab, applying PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in adequate CE. Most data for nivolumab and pembrolizumab in GUCs did not point towards adequate CE. Contrary to ipilimumab, either nivolumab or pembrolizumab is cost-effective for melanoma. Despite these conclusions, it cannot be overstated that careful patient selection is critical for CE. Future publication of CE investigations and clinical trials (along with longer follow-up of existing data) could substantially alter conclusions from this analysis.

Project description:BackgroundSmall cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a very aggressive and proliferative disease, with little progress being having made for its treatment in decades. Our goal was to evaluate the effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and identify optimal first-line interventions for the treatment of SCLC.MethodsA systematic literature search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed and oncology conference proceedings were conducted. Randomized trials evaluating ICIs for SCLC were included. We use the risk of bias tool in RevMan 5.3 to assess the quality of studies. We used Stata version 15.0 to carry out data direct comparison and R version 4.0.2 to conduct the Bayesian network analysis.ResultsA total of 16 relevant clinical trials comprising 4,476 patients were included. We found the magnitude of efficacy for ICIs as first-line therapy conferred a statistically significant benefit in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy alone. The results were 0.82 (95% CI, 0.76-0.89, P<0.001) and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.74-0.86, P<0.001). For objective response rate (ORR), the result (1.13, 95% CI, 0.97-1.31, P=0.109) was not significant. In the second-line and maintenance treatment, no additional benefit was observed. With regard to safety, results showed that for all grades of AEs and grades 3-4 AEs, the pooled results were 1.36 (95% CI: 0.50-3.70; P=0.543) and 1.35 (95% CI: 0.58-3.15; P=0.484) respectively. In addition, the indirect comparison results showed that nivolumab combined with chemotherapy led to the most significant improvement in OS, while durvalumab combined with chemotherapy was a more efficacious therapy for improving ORR compared with the other interventions; the probability were the best treatments was 73.93% and 81% respectively.DiscussionOur results showed ICIs combined with etoposide and platinum-based drugs as first-line treatment of SCLC have benefits for patients and there was no evidence of a significant difference in efficacy among the different ICI drugs used for the first-line therapy. As for toxicity, the ICIs did not increase the frequency AEs for patients. However, as some studies are ongoing and the full data have still not been reported, our conclusions may not be completely representative.

Dataset Information

Cost effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review.

Publications

Cost effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets