Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line treatment with crizotinib in ROS1-rearranged advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Canada

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

While no direct comparative data exist for crizotinib in ROS1+ non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), studies have suggested clinical benefit with this targeted agent. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of crizotinib compared to standard platinum-doublet chemotherapy for first-line treatment of ROS1+ advanced NSCLC.

Methods

A Markov model was developed with a 10-year time horizon from the perspective of the Canadian publicly-funded health care system. Health states included progression-free survival (PFS), up to two further lines of therapy post-progression, palliation and death. Given a lack of comparative data and small study samples, crizotinib or chemotherapy studies with advanced ROS1+ NSCLC patients were identified and time-to-event data from digitized Kaplan-Meier curves were collected to pool PFS data. Costs of drugs, treatment administration, monitoring, adverse events and palliative care were included in 2018 Canadian dollars, with 1.5% discounting. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated probabilistically using 5000 simulations.

Results

In the base-case probabilistic analysis, crizotinib produced additional 0.885 life-years and 0.772 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an incremental cost of $238,077, producing an ICER of $273,286/QALY gained. No simulations were found to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY gained. A scenario analysis assuming efficacy equivalent to the ALK+ NSCLC population showed a slightly more favorable cost-effectiveness profile for crizotinib.

Conclusions

Available data appear to support superior activity of crizotinib compared to chemotherapy in ROS1+ advanced NSCLC. At the list price, crizotinib was not cost-effective at commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds across a wide range of sensitivity analyses.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08746-z.

SUBMITTER: Beca J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8556902 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesFood and Drug Administration (FDA) approved crizotinib for advanced ROS1-rearranged (ROS1+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients due to a single-arm study PROFILE 1001. However, there is no direct comparison between crizotinib and platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy.Materials and methodsClinical data of advanced ROS1+NSCLC patients treated with first-line crizotinib or platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy between August 2010 and December 2017 were analyzed.ResultsSeventy-seven patients were eligible, including 30 (39.0%) in the crizotinib group and 47 (61.0%) in the platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy group. The median follow-up was 28.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.2-39.0). The objective response rate (ORR) of crizotinib (86.7%, 95% CI: 73.3-96.7) was higher than that of platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy (44.7%, 95% CI: 29.8-57.4, P < .001). The disease control rate (DCR) was 96.7% (95% CI: 90.0-100) in the crizotinib group and 85.1% (95% CI: 74.5-95.7) in the chemotherapy group (P = .140). Significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) was observed in the patients treated with crizotinib (18.4 months, 95% CI: 6.4-30.3) versus platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy (8.6 months, 95% CI: 6.9-10.3, P < .001). Overall survival (OS) was also compared between the two groups and no significant difference was seen (Not reach vs 28.4 months [95% CI: 20.7-36.0], P = .176). Notably, a total of 37 patients have treatment crossover after the failure of first-line treatment. Among those patients, difference in OS was not statistically significant between seven patients who have given first-line crizotinib (38.6 months, 95% CI: 0-81.0) and 30 patients who have given platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy initially (32.8 months, 95% CI: 11.9-53.8, P = .805).ConclusionsOur results suggested that first-line crizotinib had higher ORR and longer PFS than platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy in patients with advanced ROS1+NSCLC, but the differences were not observed for OS.

Project description:BackgroundIn the ongoing phase I PROFILE 1001 study, crizotinib showed antitumor activity in patients with ROS1-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we present updated antitumor activity, overall survival (OS) and safety data (additional 46.2 months follow-up) for patients with ROS1-rearranged advanced NSCLC from PROFILE 1001.Patients and methodsROS1 status was determined by FISH or reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. All patients received crizotinib at a starting dose of 250 mg twice daily.ResultsFifty-three patients received crizotinib, with a median duration of treatment of 22.4 months. At data cut-off, treatment was ongoing in 12 patients (23%). The objective response rate (ORR) was 72% [95% confidence interval (CI), 58% to 83%], including six confirmed complete responses and 32 confirmed partial responses; 10 patients had stable disease. Responses were durable (median duration of response 24.7 months; 95% CI, 15.2-45.3). ORRs were consistent across different patient subgroups. Median progression-free survival was 19.3 months (95% CI, 15.2-39.1). A total of 26 deaths (49%) occurred (median follow-up period of 62.6 months), and of the remaining 27 patients (51%), 14 (26%) were in follow-up at data cut-off. Median OS was 51.4 months (95% CI, 29.3 to not reached) and survival probabilities at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months were 79%, 67%, 53%, and 51%, respectively. No correlation was observed between OS and specific ROS1 fusion partner. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were mainly grade 1 or 2, per CTCAE v3.0. There were no grade ≥4 TRAEs and no TRAEs associated with permanent discontinuation. No new safety signals were reported with long-term crizotinib treatment.ConclusionsThese findings serve as a new benchmark for OS in ROS1-rearranged advanced NSCLC, and continue to show the clinically meaningful benefit and safety of crizotinib in this molecular subgroup.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00585195.

Project description:BackgroundROS1 fusions are driver molecular alterations in 1-2% of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Several tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have shown high efficacy in patients whose tumors harbour a ROS1 fusion. However, the limited availability of preclinical models of ROS1-positive NSCLC hinders the discovery of new drugs and the understanding of the mechanisms underlying drug resistance and strategies to overcome it.MethodsThe ADK-VR2 cell line was derived from the pleural effusion of a treatment-naïve NSCLC patient bearing SDC4-ROS1 gene fusion. The sensitivity of ADK-VR2 and its crizotinib-resistant clone ADK-VR2 AG143 (selected in 3D culture in the presence of crizotinib) to different TKIs was tested in vitro, in both 2D and 3D conditions. Tumorigenic and metastatic ability was assessed in highly immunodeficient mice. In addition, crizotinib efficacy on ADK-VR2 was evaluated in vivo.Results2D-growth of ADK-VR2 cells was partially inhibited by crizotinib. On the contrary, the treatment with other TKIs, such as lorlatinib, entrectinib and DS-6051b, did not result in cell growth inhibition. TKIs showed dramatically different efficacy on ADK-VR2 cells, depending on the cell culture conditions. In 3D culture, ADK-VR2 growth was indeed almost totally inhibited by lorlatinib and DS-6051b. The clone ADK-VR2 AG143 showed higher resistance to crizotinib treatment in vitro, compared to its parental cell line, in both 2D and 3D cultures. Similarly to ADK-VR2, ADK-VR2 AG143 growth was strongly inhibited by lorlatinib in 3D conditions. Nevertheless, ADK-VR2 AG143 sphere formation was less affected by TKIs treatment, compared to the parental cell line. In vivo experiments highlighted the high tumorigenic and metastatic ability of ADK-VR2 cell line, which, once injected in immunodeficient mice, gave rise to both spontaneous and experimental lung metastases while the crizotinib-resistant clone ADK-VR2 AG143 showed a slower growth in vivo. In addition, ADK-VR2 tumor growth was significantly reduced but not eradicated by crizotinib treatment.ConclusionsThe ADK-VR2 cell line is a promising NSCLC preclinical model for the study of novel targeted therapies against ROS1 fusions and the mechanisms of resistance to TKI therapies.

Project description:ObjectiveResults of CameL-sq has revealed the clinical benefits to patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sq-NSCLC). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus chemotherapy to treat sq-NSCLC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.MethodsWe used a partitioned survival model with a lifetime horizon to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy in treating sq-NSCLC. Baseline characteristics of patients and key clinical data were extracted from CameL-sq. Costs and utilities were collected from the open-access database and published literature. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were chosen as economic outcome indicators. We also performed a sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and scenario analysis to verify the stability of the basic analysis results and explore the results under different scenarios.ResultsCombination therapy added 0.47 QALYS and 0.91 life-years with an incremental cost of $6,347.81 compared with chemotherapy, which had an ICER of $13,572 per QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that camrelizumab plus chemotherapy had a 37.8% probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of 1 time GDP per capital. When WTP was set as 3 times GDP per capital, combination therapy had significant cost-effectiveness. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that cost of the best supportive care was the factor with the greatest influence. The subgroup analysis found that combination therapy was associated with cost-effectiveness in several subgroups, namely, patients with disease stage IIIB/IIIC and with PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≤ 1%. Scenario analysis showed that ICER was positively correlated with the price of camrelizumab.ConclusionIn this economic evaluation, camrelizumab plus chemotherapy was unlikely to be cost-effective compared with chemotherapy in the first line therapy of sq-NSCLC from a perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Reducing the price of camrelizumab and tailoring treatments based on individual patient factors might improve the cost-effectiveness. Our findings may provide evidence for clinicians in making optimal decisions in general clinical practice.

Project description:BackgroundROS1-rearranged lung cancers benefit from first-line crizotinib therapy; however, clinical and molecular factors that could affect crizotinib efficacy in ROS1-rearranged lung cancers are not yet well-elucidated. Our retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy of chemotherapy and crizotinib in the first-line treatment of ROS1-rearranged advanced lung cancer and evaluate various clinical and molecular factors that might impact crizotinib efficacy in real-world practice.MethodsTreatment responses, survival outcomes, and patterns of disease progression were analyzed for 235 patients with locally advanced to advanced disease who received first-line chemotherapy (n = 67) or crizotinib (n = 168).ResultsThe overall response rate was 85.7% (144/168) for first-line crizotinib and 41.8% (28/67) for chemotherapy. Patients treated with first-line crizotinib (n = 168) had significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS) than chemotherapy (n = 67) (18.0 months vs. 7.0 months, p < 0.001). Patients harboring single CD74-ROS1 (n = 90) had significantly shorter median PFS with crizotinib than those harboring non-CD74 ROS1 fusions (n = 69) (17.0 months vs. 21.0 months; p = 0.008). Patients with baseline brain metastasis (n = 45) had a significantly shorter PFS on first-line crizotinib than those without brain metastasis (n = 123) (16.0 months vs. 22.0 months; p = 0.03). At progression, intracranial-only progression (n = 40), with or without baseline CNS metastasis, was associated with longer median PFS than those with extracranial-only progression (n = 64) (19.0 months vs. 13.0 months, p < 0.001). TP53 mutations were the most common concomitant mutation, detected in 13.1% (7/54) of patients with CD74-ROS1 fusions, and 18.8% (6/32) with non-CD74 ROS1 fusions. Patients with concomitant TP53 mutations (n=13) had significantly shorter PFS than those who had wild-type TP53 (n = 81) (6.5 months vs. 21.0 months; p < 0.001). PFS was significantly shorter for the patients who harbored concomitant driver mutations (n = 9) (11.0 months vs 24.0 months; p = 0.0167) or concomitant tumor suppressor genes (i.e., TP53, RB1, or PTEN) (n = 25) (9.5 months vs 24.0 months; p < 0.001) as compared to patients without concomitant mutations (n = 58).ConclusionOur results demonstrate that baseline brain metastatic status and various molecular factors could contribute to distinct clinical outcomes from first-line crizotinib therapy of patients with ROS1-rearranged lung cancer.Clinical trials registrationCORE, NCT03646994.