Cost-effectiveness analysis of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma based on the NEOCRTEC5010 trial

Cost-effectiveness analysis of durvalumab plus tremelimumab as first-line therapy in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

The HIMALAYA trial found that durvalumab plus tremelimumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared with sorafenib.

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab plus tremelimumab compared with sorafenib in the first-line HCC setting.

Design

A Markov model-based cost-effectiveness analysis.

Methods

We created a Markov model to compare healthcare costs and clinical outcomes of HCC patients treated with durvalumab plus tremelimumab in the first-line setting compared with sorafenib. We estimated transition probabilities from randomized trials. Lifetime direct healthcare costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated for first-line durvalumab plus tremelimumab compared with sorafenib from a US payer's perspective.

Results

In the base case, first-line durvalumab plus tremelimumab was associated with an improvement of 0.29 QALYs compared with sorafenib. While both treatment strategies were associated with considerable lifetime expenditures, first-line durvalumab plus tremelimumab was less expensive than sorafenib ($188,405 vs $218,584). The incremental net monetary benefit for durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus sorafenib was $72,762 (valuing QALYs at $150,000 each). The results of durvalumab plus tremelimumab were better in terms of costs and health outcomes in patients with HBV-related HCC and high alpha-fetoprotein levels.

Conclusion

First-line durvalumab plus tremelimumab was estimated to be dominant for the treatment of unresectable HCC compared with sorafenib from a US payer's perspective.

Cost-Effectiveness of Nivolumab Immunotherapy vs. Paclitaxel or Docetaxel Chemotherapy as Second-Line Therapy in Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in China

This study aimed to evaluate and compare nivolumab's cost-effectiveness with chemotherapy in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. To this end, the researchers utilized a partitioned survival model with three mutually exclusive health stages. The characteristics of the patients used as inclusion and exclusion criteria in this model were the same as those used for patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the ATTRACTION-3 study. The ATTRACTION-3 trial, which took place between January 7, 2016 and November 12, 2018, also yielded important clinical data. Data on medical and economic preferences were collected from real-world clinical practices. Costs, quality-adjusted life years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated for the two therapy options. The model uncertainty was investigated using a deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. When compared to chemotherapy, nivolumab was linked with an increase of 0.28 quality-adjusted life years with an increased cost of US$ 36,956.81 per patient in the base case analysis of a hypothetical sample of 419 patients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in the deterministic sensitivity analysis was US$ 132,029.46/quality-adjusted life year, with a 48.02% probability of being cost-effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds of US$ 132,029.22/quality-adjusted life year. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio remained greater than US$ 80,000/quality-adjusted life year in the deterministic sensitivity analyses. To be more cost-effective and remain below the threshold of 37,653 US$/quality-adjusted life year, which the Chinese population can afford, nivolumab's price would have to be lowered sharply by 53.50%. Nivolumab is clinically beneficial but not cost-effective when compared to chemotherapy. A substantial reduction in nivolumab's drug acquisition cost would be necessary to make it cost-effective for immunotherapy.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who achieved clinical complete response when induction chemoradiation finished: A phase II random

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

More than 40% of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) exhibit pathological complete responses (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), and theoretically, these patients may be cured by CRT and omit surgery. This prospectively randomized pilot study compared definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) with nCRT in patients with locally advanced ESCC who achieved clinical complete responses (cCRs) to nCRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Single center, randomized, open phase 2 study of 256 patients with locally advanced ESCC enrolled between April 2016 and November 2018. Immediately when nCRT finished, patients enrolled underwent response evaluations within 1 week. Patients with cCR were randomly allocated to undergo surgery (arm A) or complete CRT up to the definitive radiation dose (arm B). The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Finally, 71 patients were randomly assigned to the nCRT (n = 36) and dCRT (n = 35) arms. The median observation time was 35.7 months. The 3-year DFS rate was 56.43% in arm A versus 54.73% in arm B (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.862, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.452 to 1.645, P = 0.652). The 3-year overall survival (OS) rates in arms A and B were 69.5% and 62.3% (HR = 0.824, 95% CI = 403-1.688, P = 0.597), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our treatment response evaluation criteria, survival of the patients with cCR after nCRT was not significant different between nCRT group and dCRT group. An optimized response evaluation strategy soon after nCRT may guide next therapy decisions for patients with locally advanced ESCC.

A cost-effectiveness modeling study of treatment interventions for stage I to III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Esophageal cancer causes considerable costs for health systems. Appropriate treatment options for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) can reduce medical costs and provide more improved outcomes for health systems and patients. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of treatment interventions for patients with ESCC according to the Iranian health system.

Material and methods

A five-state Markov model with a 15-year time horizon was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment interventions based on stage for ESCC patients. Costs ($US 2021) and outcomes were calculated from the Iranian health system, with a discount rate of 3%. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the potential effects of uncertain variables on the model results.

Results

In stage I, the Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) treatment yielded the lowest total costs and highest total QALY for a total of $1473 per QALY, making it the dominant strategy compared with esophagectomy and EMR followed by ablation. In stages II and III, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by surgery dominated esophagectomy. CRT followed by surgery was also cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $2172.8 per QALY compared to CRT.

Conclusion

From the Iranian health system’s perspective, EMR was the dominant strategy versus esophagectomy and EMR followed by ablation for ESCC patients in stage I. The CRT followed by surgery was a cost-effective intervention compared to CRT and esophagectomy in stages II and III.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-022-00352-5.

Neoadjuvant Therapy Versus Upfront Surgery for Patients With Clinical Stage 2 or 3 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery (NT) is the standard of care for esophageal cancer in Western countries, upfront surgery (US) followed by adjuvant therapy (when indicated) still is commonly used in Asia to minimize overtreatment. This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of NT versus US for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

METHODS

Patients with a diagnosis of ESCC between 2010 and 2015 were divided into NT or US according to the intention to treat. Two propensity score-matched groups of patients with clinical stage 2 (135 pairs) or stage 3 (194 pairs) disease were identified and compared in terms of overall survival (OS) and direct costs incurred within 3 years after diagnosis.

RESULTS

The esophagectomy rates after NT were 82% for stage 2 and 88% for stage 3 disease. Compared with US, surgery after NT was associated with higher R0 resection rates, a lower number of dissected lymph nodes, and similar postoperative mortality. On an intention-to-treat analysis, stage 3 patients who received NT had a significantly better 3-year OS rate (45%) than those treated with US (37%) (p = 0.029) without significant cost increases (p = 0.89). However, NT for clinical stage 2 disease neither increased costs nor improved 3-year OS rates (47% vs 47%; p = 0.88). At a willingness-to-pay level of US$50,000 per life-year, the probability of NT being cost-effective was 92% for stage 3 versus 59% for stage 2 ESCC.

CONCLUSION

Because of its higher cost-effectiveness, NT is preferable to US for patients with clinical stage 3 ESCC, but US remains a viable option for stage 2 disease.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Camrelizumab vs. Placebo Added to Chemotherapy as First-Line Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in China

Objective

The purpose of this cost-effectiveness analysis was to estimate the effects of adding camrelizumab to standard chemotherapy as the first-line treatment in patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) on health and economic outcomes in China.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to simulate the clinical course of typical patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC in the ESCORT-1st trial. Weibull survival model was employed to fit the Kaplan-Meier progression-free survival and overall survival probabilities of the camrelizumab-chemotherapy and placebo-chemotherapy strategy, respectively. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were estimated over a 5-year lifetime horizon. Meanwhile, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the uncertainty in the model.

Results

On baseline analysis, the incremental effectiveness and cost of camrelizumab-chemotherapy versus placebo-chemotherapy were 0.15 QALYs and $7,110.56, resulting in an ICER of $46,671.10/QALY, higher than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of China ($31,498.70/QALY). The results were sensitive to the utility of PFS and cost of camrelizumab.

Conclusion

The findings from the present analysis suggest that the addition of camrelizumab to chemotherapy might not be cost-effective in patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC in China.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of camrelizumab in the second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in China

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment for patients with advanced/metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

METHODS

A trial-based Markov model was constructed using Excel to integrate clinical and economic data in a hypothetical cohort of advanced/metastatic ESCC patients with a 5-year time horizon. Clinical inputs were derived directly from the ESCORT trial (NCT03099382). Weibull distribution was used to fit transition probabilities extracted from the Kaplan-Meier curves. Cost inputs were estimated from the Beijing Medicine Sunshine Purchasing official website, local charges, publications and expert opinions. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model results.

RESULTS

At 5 years, camrelizumab had higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (0.782 vs. 0.499) and higher cost (US$31,537 vs. US$6,998) than chemotherapy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated to be US$86,745 per QALY gained. The two primary parameters upon which this result was most sensitive were median overall survival of camrelizumab and camrelizumab cost. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of three times per capita gross domestic product (US$30,094 per QALY gained), the probability of camrelizumab being cost-effective was 33.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Camrelizumab was not cost-effective as a second-line treatment for advanced/metastatic ESCC patients in China compared with chemotherapy.

LncRNA LINC00467 acted as an oncogene in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma by accelerating cell proliferation and preventing cell apoptosis via the miR-485-5p/DPAGT1 axis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Esophageal carcinoma has been regarded as one of the top 10 common malignancies globally. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is an important subtype of esophageal carcinoma with approximately 20% survival rate. Long noncoding RNAs were documented to regulate the occurrence or progression of several tumors. However, neither the biological role nor the molecular mechanism of LINC00467 has been explored. This research is aimed to investigating the regulatory mechanism of LINC00467 in ESCC.

METHODS

In this study, a series of experiments including reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction, Cell Counting Kit-8, luciferase reporter, western blot, and RNA immunoprecipitation were designed and conducted to explore the potential function and mechanism of LINC00467 in ESCC.

RESULTS

According to experimental results, we found out upregulated LINC00467 improved cell proliferation, but hindered cell apoptosis. In mechanism, miR-485-5p was predicted, screened out, and validated to combine with LINC00467, which displayed lower expression in ESCC. Additionally, miR-485-5p negatively regulated and directly targeted DPAGT1. Rescue assays suggested that DPAGT1 amplification was able to recover the influence of LINC00467 deficiency on cell proliferation and apoptosis. Furthermore, knockdown of LINC00467 suppressed tumor growth in vivo.

CONCLUSION

We proved that LINC00467 acted as an oncogene in ESCC by accelerating cell proliferation and preventing cell apoptosis via miR-485-5p/DPAGT1 axis. This may provide a potential diagnostic marker for ESCC treatment.