Cost-effectiveness of toripalimab plus chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Cost-effectiveness analysis of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma in China

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone as a first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).

METHODS

A partitioned survival model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced or metastatic OSCC over a 10-year lifetime horizon from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Costs and utilities were derived from the drug procurement platform and published literature. The model outcomes comprised of costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to address uncertainty and ensure the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy yielded an additional 0.337 QALYs and incremental costs of $7,117.007 compared with placebo plus chemotherapy, generating an ICER of $21,116.75 per QALY, which was between 1 time ($12,674.89/QALY) and 3 times GDP ($38,024.67/QALY) per capita. In one-way sensitivity analysis, the ICER is most affected by the cost of oxaliplatin, paclitaxel and tislelizumab. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, when the willingness-to-pay threshold was set as 1 or 3 times GDP per capita, the probability of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy being cost-effective was 1% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy was probably cost-effective compared with chemotherapy alone as the first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic OSCC in China.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in China

Introduction

First-line treatment with tislelizumab plus chemotherapy has shown clinical benefits for patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) in China, while its economic burden is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

Methods

We constructed a partitioned survival model to compare the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy with chemotherapy in patients with advanced OSCC. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes were extracted from RATIONALE-306. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were selected as the study outcomes. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted to test the stability of the results.

Results

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy provided additional 0.48 QALYs with the incremental cost of $16,587.2 than chemotherapy, of which ICER was $34,699.72 per QALY. When the willingness-to-pay threshold was set as $37,260, the novel therapy had a probability of 77% to be cost-effective. Our base-case analysis results were sensitive to utilities of progression-free survival and progression of disease. Our subgroup analysis showed that the novel therapy was associated with cost-effectiveness in patients with a high expression of PD-L1.

Conclusion

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy was likely to be more cost-effective compared with chemotherapy in the first-line therapy of advanced OSCC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Our findings can provide clinicians and decision-makers with evidence of the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab.

Evaluating the impact of PD-1 inhibitor treatment on key health outcomes for cancer patients in China

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of studies examining the influence of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors on the health outcomes of cancer patients in China.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate prospective health outcomes associated with introducing PD-1 inhibitor treatment in China over five years.

METHOD

We constructed a partitioned survival model to assess disparities in health outcomes over a 5-year time frame between two scenarios: one involving the availability of PD-1 inhibitor class with standard of care and the other involving standard of care alone. The impact on various health outcomes were assessed, including life years (LYs) gained, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, progression-free survival (PFS) years gained, the reduction in the number of grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs), and the improvement in objective remission rates (ORR). A sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the robustness and reliability of the model.

RESULTS

From 2023 to 2027, the incorporation of PD-1 inhibitor class treatments was anticipated to yield substantial improvements in health outcomes, with an estimated increase of 1,336,332 LYs (+ 24.7%), 1,065,359 QALYs (+ 30.3%), and 1,177,564 PFS years (+ 57.4%) compared to standard of care alone. Simultaneously, the number of grade 3-5 AEs decreased by 334,976 (- 13.0%), and the ORR saw a 19.1% increase (+ 105.6%) relative to standard of care treatment alone.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a analysis of the potential beneficial effects on health outcomes in the Chinese population after introducing PD-1 inhibitor class treatment. The findings suggest the PD-1 inhibitor class will significantly improve patient survival.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors versus chemotherapy as second-line therapy for advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Background

Recently, several novel programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors have been approved for second-line treating advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), including camrelizumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, sintilimab and tislelizumab. However, the optimal treatment regimen remained ambiguous.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy, safety and economy of available PD-1 inhibitors to determine the optimal treatment from the Chinese healthcare system perspective.

Design

A systematic review and economic evaluation.

Data sources and methods

A systematic review was undertaken utilizing PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase and Scopus databases to identify eligible studies until 31 August 2023. Primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs). We also developed a partitioned survival model at 3-week intervals based on five clinical trials to predict long-term costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for various treatment options. Direct medical costs and utility values were obtained from public drug bidding databases, clinical trials or published literature. The parameter uncertainties within the model were determined via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

Five randomized controlled trials involving 2837 patients were included in the analysis. Compared with other treatments examined, camrelizumab provided the best PFS benefits [hazard ratio (HR): 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-0.86], and pembrolizumab provided the best OS benefits (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37-0.82). Nivolumab caused a relatively lower incidence of treatment-related AEs (HR: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.05-0.20) and grade 3-5 AEs (HR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.08-0.21) than other immunotherapy regimens. In the economic evaluation, average 10-year costs ranged from $5,433.86 (chemotherapy) to $50,617.95 (nivolumab) and mean QALYs ranged from 0.55 (chemotherapy) to 0.82 (camrelizumab). Pembrolizumab was eliminated because of dominance. Of the remaining strategies, when the willingness-to-pay thresholds were 1, 2 and 3 times GDP per capita in 2022, sintilimab, tislelizumab and camrelizumab were the most cost-effective treatment options, respectively.

Conclusion

Sintilimab might be the optimal treatment alternative for second-line therapy of advanced OSCC in China, followed by tislelizumab and camrelizumab.

Trial registration

This study has been registered on the PROSPERO database with the registration number CRD42023495204.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of nivolumab versus placebo for relapsed malignant mesothelioma

BACKGROUND

Although nivolumab has shown clinical benefits for relapsed malignant mesothelioma, its cost-effectiveness requires further investigation.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab compared to placebo for relapsed malignant mesotheliomas from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

METHOD

A three-state Markov model was developed based on data from the phase 3 randomized CONFIRM clinical trial. The drug cost and utility values for the health state were obtained from the relevant literature. The measured outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses (OWSA) were performed to assess the uncertainty of the model.

RESULTS

Patients receiving nivolumab gained more health benefits (0.65 QALYs vs. 0.43 QALYs). The cost was higher ($25,806.08 vs. $9,310.74) than for patients in the placebo group, resulting in an ICER of $75,805.11/QALY, which was above the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of three times per capita GDP ($35,864.61) in China. The result of OWSA indicated that the cost of nivolumab, the utility of the disease progression, and the discount rate were the most significant factors. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that the probability that nivolumab was not cost-effective as was 100.00% above the specified WTP threshold.

CONCLUSION

From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, nivolumab was not as cost-effective as placebo for relapsed malignant mesothelioma.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of toripalimab plus chemotherapy for patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in China

BACKGROUND

The aim of the current analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of toripalimab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone as the first-line option for patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) from the perspective of Chinese health-care system.

METHODS

A partitioned survival model was conducted to track 3-week patients' transition and evaluate the health and economic outcomes in 10-year horizon of the two competing first-line treatment among toripalimab plus chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone. The survival data were gathered from the JUPITER-06 trial, and cost and utility values were obtained from the local charges and published studies. Total costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were the model outcomes. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Treatment with toripalimab plus chemotherapy yields marginal cost of $8,639.74 and additional 0.65 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $13,280.97 per additional QALY gained, which was lower than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $38,224 in China. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses confirmed the robustness of the model outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Toripalimab plus chemotherapy was likely to be the cost-effective first-line option for patients with advanced ESCC compared with chemotherapy alone with the WTP threshold of $38,224 per additional QALY gained from the perspective of the Chinese health-care system.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Tislelizumab Plus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Advanced or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in China

Background

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy improved overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone, while maintaining an acceptable level of safety. But it's still unclear which strategy is the most cost-effective. The objective of the study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) versus chemotherapy alone.

Methods

A partitioned survival model with three states was constructed based on the RATIONALE-306 trial. The model's time horizon was ten years, and its cycle was three weeks. Only direct medical costs were considered from the healthcare perspective in China. Calculations were performed on total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). One-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to determine the uncertainty regarding model parameters.

Results

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy provided 1.35 QALYs for $26,450.77, while chemotherapy alone provided 0.89 QALY for $16,687.15. Compared to chemotherapy alone, tislelizumab had an ICER of $21,062.09/QALY. At the threshold of three times the Chinese GDP per capita ($38,253/QALY), the PSA indicated that tislelizumab had a 96.4% likelihood of being designated cost-effective. At the threshold of 1.5 times the Chinese GDP per capita ($19,126.5/QALY), the PSA indicated that tislelizumab had a probability of 48.7% of being designated cost-effective.

Conclusion

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as the first treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC may be a cost-effective option compared to chemotherapy alone at 3 times Chinese GDP per capita.