Phase-specific and lifetime costs of cancer care in Ontario, Canada

Lifetime health care costs of oropharyngeal cancer for commercially insured patients in the United States

BACKGROUND

Incidence of oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) is expected to increase but its health care cost is unknown. The purpose for this study was to estimate the phase-specific lifetime health care costs of OPC for commercially insured individuals in the United States.

METHODS

We used the Truven MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounter Database to identify our patient population. Cox survival analysis was used to estimate patients' monthly survival probabilities. We determined the ratios of the cumulative costs up to a particular survival probability and the costs from that time point to death for all subjects who died before end of the 5-year follow-up period. This relationship was then used to predict phase-specific lifetime health care costs.

RESULTS

Our study included 2445 patients with OPC. The predicted phase-specific lifetime health care costs attributable to OPC were $88 872, $24 038, and $1537 in the initial, continuous, and terminal phases, respectively, among commercially insured patients.

The Real-World Lifetime Economic Burden of Urothelial Carcinoma by Stage at Diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is generally diagnosed early and may incur significant lifetime costs. This study estimated, from the payer's perspective, the lifetime costs among patients diagnosed with UC according to stage at diagnosis.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis of the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database identified patients ≥66 years with newly diagnosed UC from 2004-2013. Patients were followed from UC diagnosis to death or last follow-up to estimate lifetime costs. Costs were allocated to 3 phases: diagnosis (≤3 months after diagnosis), terminal (≤3 months before death), and continuation (months between diagnosis and terminal phases). Survival-adjusted lifetime costs (total and major UC-related) were estimated for patients with UC based on stage at diagnosis (stages 0 through IV) and in a subgroup of patients receiving ≥1 systemic line of chemotherapy (LOC).

RESULTS

The sample included 15,588 patients: 3,446 stage 0 (8% ≥1 LOC; median [IQR] follow-up in months: 44 [23-71]); 3,902 stage I (12% ≥1 LOC; 33 [15-62]); 4,301 stage II (26% ≥1 LOC; 17 [7-39]); 1,612 stage III (25% ≥1 LOC; 17 [7-42]); and 2,327 stage IV (33% ≥1 LOC; 8 [3-18]). Median age was 78 years and 72% were male. Mean lifetime costs were lowest for stage IV patients (stage 0, $151,626; stage 1, $150,123; stage II, $149,728; stage III, $190,996; stage IV, $117,503). Hospitalizations not involving a cystectomy contributed about half of lifetime costs across all stages. Cystectomy contributed 2-13% of the total lifetime UC costs ($3,356 stage 0; $7,011 stage I; $11,855 stage II; $25,509 stage III; $11,693 stage IV). UC-related office visits contributed 8-15% of lifetime costs ($11,717 stage 0; $14,611 stage I; $19,882 stage II; $21,480 stage III; $17,820 stage IV).

CONCLUSION

UC continues to be a costly cancer with stage III patients having highest lifetime costs. Hospitalizations drive most of the lifetime costs across all stages; most of these hospitalizations did not involve costs related to cystectomy. Treatment plans requiring shorter and fewer hospitalizations may lessen the economic burden of UC.

Lifetime Costs of Surviving Cancer-A Queensland Study (COS-Q): Protocol of a Large Healthcare Data Linkage Study

Australia-wide, there are currently more than one million cancer survivors. There are over 32 million world-wide. A trend of increasing cancer incidence, medical innovations and extended survival places growing pressure on healthcare systems to manage the ongoing and late effects of cancer treatment. There are no published studies of the long-term health service use and cost of cancer survivorship on a population basis in Australia. All residents of the state of Queensland, Australia, diagnosed with a first primary malignancy from 1997–2015 formed the cohort of interest. State and national healthcare databases are linked with cancer registry records to capture all health service utilization and healthcare costs for 20 years (or death, if this occurs first), starting from the date of cancer diagnosis, including hospital admissions, emergency presentations, healthcare costing data, Medicare services and pharmaceuticals. Data analyses include regression and economic modeling. We capture the whole journey of health service contact and estimate long-term costs of all cancer patients diagnosed and treated in Queensland by linking routinely collected state and national healthcare data. Our results may improve the understanding of lifetime health effects faced by cancer survivors and estimate related healthcare costs. Research outcomes may inform policy and facilitate future planning for the allocation of healthcare resources according to the burden of disease.

Cost-Utility of Early Breast Cancer Surveillance in Survivors of Thoracic Radiation-Treated Adolescent Hodgkin Lymphoma

BACKGROUND

Adolescent women treated for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) are at increased risk of breast cancer (BC). We evaluate the cost-utility of eight high-risk BC surveillance strategies for this population, including the Children's Oncology Group guideline of same-day annual mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) beginning at age 25 years.

METHODS

A discrete event simulation model was used to simulate the life histories of a cohort of 500 000 25-year-old women treated for HL at age 15 years. We estimated BC incidence and mortality, life expectancy, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), health-care costs, and the relative cost-utility (incremental cost-utility ratio [ICUR]) under the eight assessed surveillance strategies. One-way sensitivity analysis enabled modeling of uncertainty evaluation. A publicly funded health-care payer perspective was adopted.

RESULTS

Costs across the eight screening strategies ranged from $32 643 to $43 739, whereas QALYs ranged from 24.419 to 24.480. In an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, annual mammography beginning at age 25 years was associated with an ICUR of $43 000/QALY gained, annual MRI beginning at age 25 years with a switch to annual mammography at age 50 years had an ICUR of $148 000/QALY, and annual MRI beginning at age 25 years had an ICUR of $227 222/QALY. Among all assessed surveillance strategies, the differences in life expectancy were small.

CONCLUSIONS

Current high-risk BC surveillance guidelines do not reflect the most cost-effective strategy in survivors of adolescent HL. The results suggest that groups at high risk of BC may require high-risk surveillance guidelines that reflect their specific risk profile.

Health system costs for cancer medications and radiation treatment in Ontario for the 4 most common cancers: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Previous costing and resource estimates for cancer have not been complete owing to lack of comprehensive data on cancer-related medication and radiation treatment. Our objective was to calculate the mean overall costs per patient of cancer-related medications and radiation, as well as by disease subtype and stage, in the first year after diagnosis for the 4 most prevalent cancers in Ontario.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using provincial health administrative databases to identify population health system resources and costs for all patients diagnosed with breast, colorectal, lung or prostate cancer between Jan. 1, 2010, and Dec. 31, 2015 in Ontario. The primary outcome measure was the overall average cost per patient in the 365 days after diagnosis for cancer-related medications and radiation treatment, calculated with the use of 2 novel costing algorithms. We determined the cost by disease, disease subtype and stage as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 168 316 Ontarians diagnosed with cancer during the study period, 50 141 with breast cancer, 38 108 with colorectal cancer, 34 809 with lung cancer and 45 258 with prostate cancer. The mean per-patient cost for cancer-related medications was $8167 (95% confidence interval [CI] $8023-$8311), $6568 (95% CI $6446-$6691), $2900 (95% CI $2816-$2984) and $1211 (95% CI $1175-$1247) for breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer, respectively. The corresponding mean radiation treatment costs were $18 529 (95% CI $18 415-$18 643), $15 177 (95% CI $14 899-$15 456), $10 818 (95% CI $10 669-$10 966) and $16 887 (95% CI $16 648-$17 125). In general, stage III and IV cancers were the most expensive stages for both medications and radiation across all 4 disease sites.

INTERPRETATION

Our work updates previous costing estimates to help understand costs and resources critical to health care system planning in a single-payer system. More refined costing estimates are useful as inputs to allow for more robust health economic modelling and health care system planning.

Cervical spine evaluation in pediatric trauma: A cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE

The emergent evaluation of children with suspected traumatic cervical spine injuries (CSI) remains a challenge. Pediatric clinical pathways have been developed to stratify the risk of CSI and guide computed tomography (CT) utilization. The cost-effectiveness of their application has not been evaluated. Our objective was to examine the cost-effectiveness of three common strategies for the evaluation of children with suspected CSI after blunt injury.

METHODS

We developed a decision analytic model comparing these strategies to estimate clinical outcomes and costs for a hypothetical population of 0-17 year old patients with blunt neck trauma. Strategies included: 1) clinical pathway to stratify risk using NEXUS criteria and determine need for diagnostic testing; 2) screening radiographs as a first diagnostic; and 3) immediate CT scanning for all patients. We measured effectiveness with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs with 2018 U.S. dollars. Costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3% per year.

RESULTS

The use of the clinical pathway results in a gain of 0.04 QALYs and a cost saving of $2800 compared with immediate CT scanning of all patients. Use of the clinical pathway was less costly and more effective than immediate CT scan as long as the sensitivity of the clinical prediction rule was greater than 87% and when the sensitivity of x-ray was greater than 84%.

CONCLUSION

A strategy using a clinical pathway to first stratify risk before further diagnostic testing was less costly and more effective than either performing CT scanning or screening cervical radiographs on all patients.

Cost-utility analysis of 21-gene assay for node-positive early breast cancer

Background

For women with lymph node (ln)-positive, estrogen receptor-positive, and her2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2)-negative breast cancer (bca), current guidelines recommend treatment with both hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. The 21-gene Recurrence Score (rs) assay might be helpful in selecting patients with bca who can be spared chemotherapy when they have 1-3 positive lns and a lower risk of recurrence. In the present study, we performed a cost-utility analysis comparing use of the 21-gene rs assay with current practice from the perspective of a Canadian health care payer.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to determine costs and quality-adjusted life-years (qalys) over a patient's lifetime. Patient outcomes in both study groups were examined based on published clinical trials. Costs were derived primarily from published Canadian sources. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 1.5% annually, and costs are reported in 2016 Canadian dollars. A probabilistic analysis was used, and the model parameters were varied in a sensitivity analysis.

Results

The results indicate that use of the 21-gene rs assay was less costly ($432 less) and more effective (0.22 qalys) than current practice. The probabilistic analysis revealed that 70% of the 10,000 simulated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were in the southeast quadrant. The results were sensitive to the probability of a low rs and to the probability of receiving chemotherapy in the low-risk rs category and in current practice.

Conclusions

Use of the 21-gene rs assay could be a cost-effective strategy for Ontario patients with estrogen receptor-positive, her2-negative early bca and 1-3 positive lns.

Incorporating Future Medical Costs: Impact on Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

The inclusion of future medical costs in cost-effectiveness analyses remains a controversial issue. The impact of capturing future medical costs is likely to be particularly important in patients with cancer where costly lifelong medical care is necessary. The lack of clear, definitive pharmacoeconomic guidelines can limit comparability and has implications for decision making.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the impact of incorporating future medical costs through an applied example using original data from a clinical study evaluating the cost effectiveness of a sepsis intervention in cancer patients.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was used to capture quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lifetime costs of cancer patients from an Australian healthcare system perspective over a lifetime horizon. The evaluation considered three scenarios: (1) intervention-related costs (no future medical cost), (2) lifetime cancer costs and (3) all future healthcare costs. Inputs to the model included patient-level data from the clinical study, relative risk of death due to sepsis, cancer mortality and future medical costs sourced from published literature. All costs are expressed in 2017 Australian dollars and discounted at 5%. To further assess the impact of future costs on cancer heterogeneity, variation in survival and lifetime costs between cancer types and the implications for cost-effectiveness analysis were explored.

RESULTS

The inclusion of future medical costs increased incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) resulting in a shift from the intervention being a dominant strategy (cheaper and more effective) to an ICER of $7526/QALY. Across different cancer types, longer life expectancies did not necessarily result in greater lifetime healthcare costs. Incremental costs differed across cancers depending on the respective costs of managing cancer and survivorship, thus resulting in variations in ICERs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is scope for including costs beyond intervention costs in economic evaluations. The inclusion of future medical costs can result in markedly different cost-effectiveness results, leading to higher ICERs in a cancer population, with possible implications for funding decisions.

Cost-effectiveness of second-line atezolizumab in Canada for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness in Canada of atezolizumab compared with docetaxel or nivolumab for the treatment of advanced NSCLC after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Materials and methods: A three-state partitioned-survival model was developed. Clinical inputs were obtained from the phase III OAK trial comparing atezolizumab with docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC who progressed after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were extrapolated beyond the trial period using parametric models. A cure model assuming a 1% cure fraction was fitted to the OS data for atezolizumab. Outcomes for nivolumab were informed by a network meta-analysis (NMA) vs atezolizumab. Resource use and costs were informed by clinical expert opinion and published Canadian sources. Utility values were obtained from the OAK trial. The perspective of the analysis was that of the Canadian publicly-funded healthcare system. The base case time horizon was 10 years, and the discount rate was 1.5% annually for both costs and effects. Scenario analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results and all analyses were performed probabilistically. Results: Atezolizumab demonstrated a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain of 0.60 compared with docetaxel at an incremental cost of $85,073, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $142,074/QALY. Atezolizumab dominated nivolumab (regardless of dosing regimen), based on modest differences in both QALYs and costs. Docetaxel was most likely to be cost effective at willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds below $125,000/QALY gained, while atezolizumab was most likely to be cost effective beyond this WTP threshold. In most scenario analyses, the results remained robust to changes in parameters. A reduced time horizon and alternative approaches to the NMA had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness results. Conclusion: Atezolizumab represents a cost-effective therapeutic option in Canada for the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC who progress after first-line platinum doublet chemotherapy.

Cost-of-illness study for non-small-cell lung cancer using real-world data

Background

With recent advances in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) and current fiscal constraints within publicly funded health care systems, understanding the real-world economic effect of lung cancer management has become important. The objective of the present study was to determine the costs and resources used in the management of nsclc cohorts in Ontario.

Methods

Patients diagnosed between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2015 were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked to provincial administrative databases, capturing resources such as hospitalizations, cancer clinic visits, physician services, and systemic therapies or radiotherapy. A cost-of-illness analysis using a bottom-up approach and the GETCOST macro available at ices determined the overall total and mean costs in 2017 Canadian dollars. Resource utilization results were analyzed according to the total number of encounters per resource, the number of patients using each resource, and the number of encounters per patient. A separate cost-and-resource analysis was conducted for radiotherapy.

Results

The 24,729 nsclc patients identified included 4542 with stage iii unresectable disease and 10,103 with stage iv nonsquamous disease. The overall total cost for all nsclc patients was $1.9 billion, with inpatient hospitalizations ($635.2 million), cancer clinic visits ($323.7 million), and physician services ($301.4 million) being the top cost contributors. The mean cost per patient was $76,816. The total cost of radiotherapy was $38.5 million.

Conclusions

Real-world costs for the management of nsclc during the 5-year period examined were substantial, despite the fact that median survival was poor and treatment information was limited.

CancerCostMod: a model of the healthcare expenditure, patient resource use, and patient co-payment costs for Australian cancer patients

Although cancer survival in general has improved in Australia over the past 30 years, Indigenous Australians, socioeconomically disadvantaged persons, and people living in remote areas still experience poorer health outcomes. This paper aims to describe the development of CancerCostMod, and to present the healthcare expenditure and patient co-payments for the first 12-months post-diagnosis. The base population is a census of all cancer diagnoses (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) in Queensland, Australia between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2012 (N = 25,553). Each individual record was linked to their Queensland Health Admitted Patient Data Collection, Emergency Department Information System, Medicare Benefits Schedule, and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme records from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2015. Indigenous status was recorded for 87% of participants in our base population. Multiple imputation was used to assign Indigenous status to records where Indigenous status was missing. This base population was then weighted, using a programmed SAS macro (GREGWT) to be representative of the Australian population. We adopted a national healthcare perspective to estimate the cost of cancer for hospital episodes, ED presentations, primary healthcare, and prescription pharmaceuticals. We also adopted an individual perspective, to estimate the primary healthcare and prescription pharmaceutical patient co-payments. Once weighted, our sample represents approximately 123,900 Australians (1.7% Indigenous Australians). The total healthcare system cost of all cancers during the first 12-months post diagnosis was $4.8 billion, [corrected] and patient co-payments costs were $127 million. After adjusting for sex, age at diagnosis, Indigenous status, rurality, socioeconomic status, and broad cancer type, significant differences in costs were observed for population groups of interest within the first year post-diagnosis. This paper provides a more recent national estimate of the cost of cancer, and addresses current research gaps by highlighting the distribution of healthcare and individual costs by Indigenous status, rurality, and socioeconomic status.

Estimates and predictors of health care costs of esophageal adenocarcinoma: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) incidence is increasing rapidly. Esophageal cancer has the second lowest 5-year survival rate of people diagnosed with cancer in Canada. Given the poor survival and the potential for further increases in incidence, phase-specific cost estimates constitute an important input for economic evaluation of prevention, screening, and treatment interventions. The study aims to estimate phase-specific net direct medical costs of care attributable to EAC, costs stratified by cancer stage and treatment, and predictors of total net costs of care for EAC.

METHODS

A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using Ontario Cancer Registry-linked administrative health data from 2003 to 2011. The mean net costs of EAC care per 30 patient-days (2016 CAD) were estimated from the payer perspective using phase of care approach and generalized estimating equations. Predictors of net cost by phase of care were based on a generalized estimating equations model with a logarithmic link and gamma distribution adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors.

RESULTS

The mean net costs of EAC care per 30 patient-days were $1016 (95% CI, $955-$1078) in the initial phase, $669 (95% CI, $594-$743) in the continuing care phase, and $8678 (95% CI, $8217-$9139) in the terminal phase. Overall, stage IV at diagnosis and surgery plus radiotherapy for EAC incurred the highest cost, particularly in the terminal phase. Strong predictors of higher net costs were receipt of chemotherapy plus radiotherapy, surgery plus chemotherapy, radiotherapy alone, surgery alone, and chemotherapy alone in the initial and continuing care phases, stage III-IV disease and patients diagnosed with EAC later in a calendar year (2007-2011) in the initial and terminal phases, comorbidity in the continuing care phase, and older age at diagnosis (70-74 years), and geographic region in the terminal phase.

CONCLUSIONS

Costs of care vary by phase of care, stage at diagnosis, and type of treatment for EAC. These cost estimates provide information to guide future resource allocation decisions, and clinical and policy interventions to reduce the burden of EAC.

The economic burden of cancer care in Canada: a population-based cost study

BACKGROUND

Resource and cost issues are a growing concern in health care. Thus, it is important to have an accurate estimate of the economic burden of care. Previous work has estimated the economic burden of cancer care for Canada; however, there is some concern this estimate is too low. The objective of this analysis was to provide a comprehensive revised estimate of this burden.

METHODS

We used a case-control prevalence-based approach to estimate direct annual cancer costs from 2005 to 2012. We used patient-level administrative health care data from Ontario to correctly attribute health care costs to cancer. We employed the net cost method (cost difference between patients with cancer and control subjects without cancer) to account for costs directly and indirectly related to cancer and its sequelae. Using average patient-level cost estimates from Ontario, we applied proportions from national health expenditures data to obtain the economic burden of cancer care for Canada. All costs were adjusted to 2015 Canadian dollars.

RESULTS

Costs of cancer care rose steadily over our analysis period, from $2.9 billion in 2005 to $7.5 billion in 2012, mostly owing to the increase in costs of hospital-based care. Most expenditures for health care services increased over time, with chemotherapy and radiation therapy expenditures accounting for the largest increases over the study period. Our cost estimates were larger than those in the Economic Burden of Illness in Canada 2005-2008 report for every year except 2005 and 2006.

INTERPRETATION

The economic burden of cancer care in Canada is substantial. Further research is needed to understand how the economic burden of cancer compares to that of other diseases.

Costs of cancer care in children and adolescents in Ontario, Canada

BACKGROUND

Cancer in children and adolescents presents unique issues regarding treatment and survivorship, but few studies have measured economic burden. We estimated health care costs by phase of cancer care, from the public payer perspective, in population-based cohorts.

METHODS

Children newly diagnosed at ages 0 days-14.9 years and adolescents newly diagnosed at 15-19.9 years, from January 1, 1995 to June 30, 2010, were identified from Ontario cancer registries, and each matched to three noncancer controls. Data were linked with administrative records describing resource use for cancer and other health care. Total and net (patients minus controls) resource-specific costs ($CAD2012) were estimated using generalized estimating equations for four phases of care: prediagnosis (60 days), initial (360 days), continuing (variable), final (360 days).

RESULTS

Mean ages at diagnosis were 6 years for children (N = 4,606) and 17 years for adolescents (N = 2,443). Mean net prediagnosis phase 60-day costs were $6,177 for children and $1,018 for adolescents. Costs for initial, continuing, and final phases were $138,161, $15,756, and $316,303 per 360 days for children, and $62,919, $7,071, and $242,008 for adolescents. The highest initial phase costs were for leukemia patients ($156,225 per 360 days for children and $171,275 for adolescents). The final phase was the most costly ($316,303 per 360 days for children and $242,008 for adolescents).

CONCLUSIONS

Costs for children with cancer are much higher than for adolescents and much higher than those reported in adults. Comprehensive population-based long-term estimates of cancer costs are useful for health services planning and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Missed therapeutic and prevention opportunities in women with BRCA-mutated epithelial ovarian cancer and their families due to low referral rates for genetic counseling and BRCA testing: A review of the literature

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Fifteen percent of women with epithelial ovarian cancer have inherited mutations in the BRCA breast cancer susceptibility genes. Knowledge of her BRCA status has value both for the woman and for her family. A therapeutic benefit exists for the woman with cancer, because a new family of oral drugs, the poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, has recently been approved, and these drugs have the greatest efficacy in women who carry the mutation. For her family, there is the potential to prevent ovarian cancer in those carrying the mutation by using risk-reducing surgery. Such surgery significantly reduces the chance of developing this, for the most part, incurable cancer. Despite these potential benefits, referral rates for genetic counseling and subsequent BRCA testing are low, ranging from 10% to 30%, indicating that these therapeutic and prevention opportunities are being missed. The authors have reviewed the relevant available literature. Topics discussed are BRCA and its relation to ovarian cancer, the rates of referral for genetic counseling/BRCA testing, reasons for these low rates, potential strategies to improve on those rates, lack of effectiveness of current screening strategies, the pros and cons of risk-reducing surgery, other prevention options, and the role and value of PARP inhibitors. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:493-506. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Cost-Effectiveness of Nivolumab in Recurrent Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for patients with platinum-refractory, recurrent, metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (r/m HNSCC) are limited and prognosis is poor. The recent CheckMate 141 clinical trial demonstrated that nivolumab, an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 monoclonal antibody, was efficacious in extending the median overall survival (OS) in this patient population compared with standard therapies. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine whether nivolumab is a cost-effective treatment in this patient population and examined various subgroups to determine for which, if any, the treatment is more cost-effective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We implemented a state transition model for HNSCC with a patient cohort who had tumor progression 6 months after the last dose of platinum-containing chemotherapy and compared the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab with docetaxel. Treatment effect estimates and adverse event rates were obtained from CheckMate 141. Costs, utilities, and other model inputs were gathered from published sources. We used a Canadian perspective, a 5-year time horizon, and a 1.5% discount rate for the analysis.

RESULTS

Nivolumab extended mean OS by 4 months compared with docetaxel and resulted in fewer treatment-related adverse events, producing an incremental effectiveness of 0.13 quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The incremental cost of treatment with nivolumab was $18,823. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY, nivolumab was not a cost-effective treatment option for r/m HNSCC, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $144,744/QALY. Nivolumab would be cost-effective if its price was reduced by 20%. Our subgroup analysis seemed to indicate that nivolumab might be cost-effective for tumors with expression of programmed death-ligand 1 >5%.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that although nivolumab offers clinical benefit for the treatment of r/m HNSCC over current regimens, it is not cost-effective based on its list price. We have also established a value-based price estimate for nivolumab to be cost-effective in this patient population. Further study is required to draw a definitive conclusion on biomarkers for cost-effectiveness.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In health care settings in which cost considerations are a constraint on choice of therapy, patient selection should be carefully considered to maintain efficiency in the system. Until a biomarker for response to therapy is identified for nivolumab, this medication is unlikely to be cost-effective for most patients with recurrent, metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.