Costs of relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma among Medicare patients

Real-World Survival, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Costs Among U.S. Elderly Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treated With R-GemOx in the Relapsed/Refractory Setting

BACKGROUND

Little recent real-world evidence exists on overall survival, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs among R/R DLBCL patients treated with the combination of rituximab, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx), a widely-used regimen for patients ineligible for stem cell transplant due to age or comorbidities.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective analysis used 2014 to 2019 U.S. Medicare claims. Individuals aged ≥66 years with a new DLBCL diagnosis between October 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018 and continuous fee-for-service Medicare Part A, B, and D coverage in the 12 months pre- and postindex were followed to identify the sample of patients with evidence of R-GemOx treatment in the second-line (2L) or third-line (3L) setting. Outcomes included overall survival, all-cause and DLBCL-related HCRU, and costs after R-GemOx initiation.

RESULTS

The final sample included 157 patients who received treatment with R-GemOx in the R/R settings (mean (SD) age 77.5 (6.0) years, 39.5% age>80 years; 66.9% male; 91.1% White). Of these, 126 received R-GemOx in the 2L setting and 31 received R-GemOx in the 3L setting. Median overall survival from R-GemOx initiation was 6.9 months and 6.8 months in the 2L and 3L setting, respectively. Rates of all-cause hospitalization (68.1% [2L] and >90% [3L]) and hospice use (42.9% [2L] and 51.7% [3L]) were high in the 12 months after R-GemOx initiation. All-cause total costs were substantial ($144,653 [2L] and $142,812 [3L]) and approximately 80% of costs were DLBCL-related within 12 months of R-GemOx initiation.

CONCLUSION

Elderly U.S. Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with DLBCL who initiated R-GemOx treatment in the R/R setting have poor overall survival, high rates of HCRU, and substantial costs.

Real-world treatment patterns, survival, health resource use and costs among Medicare beneficiaries with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Aim: To examine real-world treatment patterns, survival, healthcare resource use and costs in elderly Medicare beneficiaries with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Methods: 11,880 Medicare patients aged ≥66 years with DLBCL between 1 October 2015 and 31 December 2018 were followed for ≥12 months after initiating front-line treatment. Results: Two-thirds (61.2%) of the patients received standard-of-care R-CHOP as first-line treatment. Hospitalization was common (57%) in the 12-months after initiation of 1L treatment; the mean DLCBL-related total costs were US$84,416 during the same period. Over a median follow-up of 2.1 years, 17.8% received at least 2L treatment. Overall survival was lower among later lines of treatment (median overall survival from initiation of 1L: not reached; 2L: 19.9 months; 3L: 9.8 months; 4L: 5.5 months). Conclusion: A large unmet need exists for more efficacious and well-tolerated therapies for older adults with DLBCL.

Cost-effectiveness of second-line lisocabtagene maraleucel in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

ABSTRACT

Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, received the US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2022 for second-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) for patients with refractory disease or early relapse after first-line chemoimmunotherapy. This decision was based on the TRANSFORM study demonstrating improvements in event-free survival with liso-cel compared with standard care. Given the high costs of CAR T-cell therapies, particularly as they transition to second-line treatment, a cost-effectiveness analysis is essential to determine their economic viability. The study used a partitioned survival model with standard parametric functions to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of liso-cel aganist platinum-based chemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation over a lifetime horizon The analysis relied on data from the TRANSFORM and TRANSCEND trials, established literature, and public data sets to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). For a representative cohort of US adults aged 60 years, ICER of liso-cel was $99 669 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) from a health care sector perspective and $68 212 per QALY from a societal perspective, confirming its cost-effectiveness at the $100 000 per QALY threshold. Nonetheless, under certain scenarios, liso-cel surpasses this benchmark but remains within the US acceptable range of $150 000 per QALY. A key finding underlines the importance of incorporating productivity losses into such analyses to capture the broader societal values of novel therapies. Although these therapies offer substantial clinical benefits, their high acquisition costs and limited long-term data critically challenge their economic sustainability.

Cost of Disease Progression in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma After Frontline Treatment With Rituximab Plus Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone

BACKGROUND

In recent years, novel agents have become available to treat relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); the impact of such agents on treatment costs has not been formally studied. We present results from 2 independent, retrospective, real-world cohort analyses to determine the cost of disease progression after first-line rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analyses were conducted using the IQVIA PharMetricsⓇ Plus claims database and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry-Medicare-linked database (SEER-Medicare) and included patients ≥18 years and ≥66 years, respectively. "No progression" was defined as no second-line therapy for ≥2 years after the end of first-line R-CHOP and "treated progression" as initiating a second-line therapy within 2 years following the end of first-line R-CHOP. Analyses were adjusted for baseline covariates, and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs were compared between progressors and nonprogressors.

RESULTS

The IQVIA PharMetrics Plus analysis (January 1, 2010-June 30, 2018) included 871 patients (nonprogressors, n = 725; progressors, n = 146), including 10 patients who received chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T). Treated progression was associated with significantly higher adjusted PPPM costs than no progression ($10,554 vs. $1561, P < .001). The SEER-Medicare analysis (January 1, 2010-December 31, 2017) included 4099 patients (nonprogressors, n = 3389; progressors, n = 710), including 12 patients receiving CAR-T. Treated progression was associated with significantly higher adjusted PPPM costs than no progression ($10,928 vs. $2902, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Treated progression of DLBCL increases adjusted PPPM costs by over $8000 compared with no progression.

DLBCL-associated NOTCH2 mutations escape ubiquitin-dependent degradation and promote chemoresistance

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Up to 40% of patients with DLBCL display refractory disease or relapse after standard chemotherapy treatment (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone [R-CHOP]), leading to significant morbidity and mortality. The molecular mechanisms of chemoresistance in DLBCL remain incompletely understood. Using a cullin-really interesting new gene (RING) ligase-based CRISPR-Cas9 library, we identify that inactivation of the E3 ubiquitin ligase KLHL6 promotes DLBCL chemoresistance. Furthermore, proteomic approaches helped identify KLHL6 as a novel master regulator of plasma membrane-associated NOTCH2 via proteasome-dependent degradation. In CHOP-resistant DLBCL tumors, mutations of NOTCH2 result in a protein that escapes the mechanism of ubiquitin-dependent proteolysis, leading to protein stabilization and activation of the oncogenic RAS signaling pathway. Targeting CHOP-resistant DLBCL tumors with the phase 3 clinical trial molecules nirogacestat, a selective γ-secretase inhibitor, and ipatasertib, a pan-AKT inhibitor, synergistically promotes DLBCL destruction. These findings establish the rationale for therapeutic strategies aimed at targeting the oncogenic pathway activated in KLHL6- or NOTCH2-mutated DLBCL.

Cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin in combination with chemoimmunotherapy (pola-R-CHP) in previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in Germany

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of frontline polatuzumab vedotin-R-CHP (pola-R-CHP) treatment for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in Germany by using a Markov model (lifetime horizon). Progression rates and survival outcomes were extrapolated from the POLARIX trial. Outcomes were measured in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERS) with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of €80 000/quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Assuming, 69.6% 5-year PFS with pola-R-CHP and 62.6% 5-year PFS with R-CHOP, the addition of polatuzumab vedotin resulted in an additional 0.52 life-years and an incremental 0.65 QALYs but €31 988 additional cost. Based on this, pola-R-CHP was cost-effective (€49 238/QALY) at a WTP of €80 000/QALY. The cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP is highly dependent on its long-term outcomes and cost. Our analysis is limited by the fact that the long-term outcomes of pola-R-CHP are unknown at this time.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell treatment patterns in relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma

Aim: To investigate real-world chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy treatment patterns. Patient & methods: Relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma patients who received CAR T-cell therapy were identified. Patient characteristics, setting of CAR T-cell infusion, incidence of CAR T-cell therapy-associated adverse events and healthcare resource utilization were assessed. Results: Of 1175 patients, 83% were infused inpatient. Within three days postinfusion, inpatient-infused patients had a significantly higher risk of CAR T-associated adverse events (hazard ratio: 2.67; 95% CI: 2.09-3.42) compared with outpatient-infused patients. By day 30, 67% of outpatient-infused patients were hospitalized at least once. Conclusion: These findings suggest that physicians were able to select lower-risk patients for outpatient infusion, but postinfusion hospitalizations still occur.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Associated Costs of German Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Retrospective Health Claims Data Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common form of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with increasing prevalence. Although the disease burden associated with DLBCL is high, only limited data on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs of German patients with DLBCL is available.

METHODS

Using a large claims database of the German statutory health insurance with 6.7 million enrollees, we identified patients who were newly diagnosed with DLBCL between 2011 and 2018 (index date). Treatment lines were identified based on a predefined set of medication. HCRU and related costs were collected for the entire post index period and per treatment line.

RESULTS

A total of 2495 incident DLBCL patients were eligible for the analysis. The average follow-up time after index was 41.7 months. During follow-up, 1991 patients started a first-line treatment, 868 a second-line treatment, and 354 a third-line treatment. Overall, patients spent on average (SD) 5.24 (6.17) days per month in hospital after index. While on anti-cancer treatment, this number increased to nine (10.9) in first-line, 8.7 (13.7) in second-line, and 9.4 (15.8) in third-line treatments. Overall costs per patient per month (PPPM) increased from €421 (875.70) before to €3695 (4652) after index. While on a treatment line, PPPM costs were €17,170 (10,246) in first-line, €13,362 (12,685) in second-line, and €12,112 (16,173) in third-line treatments. Time-unadjusted absolute costs sum up to €59,868 (43,331), €35,870 (37,387), and €28,832 (40,540) during first-line, second-line, and third-line treatments, respectively. The main cost drivers were hospitalizations (71% of total costs) and drug acquisition costs (18% of total costs).

CONCLUSIONS

The financial burden of DLBCL in Germany is high, mainly due to hospitalization and drug costs. Therefore, there is a high medical need for new cost-effective therapeutic options that can lower the disease burden and remain financially viable to support the growing number of patients with this aggressive disease.

Cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin combined with chemoimmunotherapy in untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

In patients with treatment-naive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the POLARIX study (A Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Polatuzumab Vedotin With Rituximab-Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, and Prednisone [R-CHP] Versus Rituximab-Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone [R-CHOP] in Participants With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma) reported a 6.5% improvement in the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS), with no difference in overall survival (OS) or safety using polatuzumab vedotin, rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (pola-R-CHP) compared with standard rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP for DLBCL. We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US adults (mean age, 65 years) with treatment-naive DLBCL by developing a Markov model (lifetime horizon) to model the cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP and R-CHOP using a range of plausible long-term outcomes. Progression rates and OS were estimated from POLARIX. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming a 5-year PFS of 69.6% with pola-R-CHP and 62.7% with R-CHOP, pola-R-CHP was cost-effective at a WTP of $150 000 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $84 308/QALY). pola-R-CHP was no longer cost-effective if its 5-year PFS was 66.1% or lower. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that pola-R-CHP is cost-effective up to a cost of $276 312 at a WTP of $150 000. pola-R-CHP was the cost-effective strategy in 56.6% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo iterations at a WTP of $150 000. If the absolute benefit in PFS is maintained over time, pola-R-CHP is cost-effective compared with R-CHOP at a WTP of $150 000/QALY. However, its cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on its long-term outcomes and costs of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. Routine usage of pola-R-CHP would add significantly to health care expenditures. Price reductions or identification of subgroups that have maximal benefit would improve cost-effectiveness.

Cost-effectiveness of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel and Tisagenlecleucel as Second-line or Later Therapy in Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

IMPORTANCE

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies are approved as a third-line or later therapy for several hematological malignant neoplasms. Recently, randomized clinical trials have investigated their efficacy as a second-line treatment in high-risk relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) compared with salvage chemotherapy followed by hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel vs standard care (SC) as second-line or later therapy for relapsed or refractory DLBCL, from both US health care sector and societal perspectives at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This economic evaluation assessed cost-effectiveness using a partitioned survival model with 2021 US dollars and QALYs over a lifetime horizon. Model inputs were derived from 2 randomized clinical trials (ZUMA-7 and BELINDA) and published literature. In the trials, patients who did not respond to SC received CAR T cells (treatment switching or crossover), either outside the protocol (ZUMA-7) or as part of the protocol (BELINDA). A separate scenario analysis compared second-line axicabtagene ciloleucel with SC alone without treatment crossover to CAR T cell therapy. Data analysis was performed from December 18, 2021, to September 13, 2022.

EXPOSURES

CAR T cell therapy (axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel) compared with salvage chemotherapy followed by HSCT.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Costs and QALYs were used to derive incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the health care sector and societal perspectives. Cost and QALYs were discounted at 3.0% annually. Univariate and multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations were applied to test model uncertainty on the ICER.

RESULTS

Second-line axicabtagene ciloleucel was associated with an ICER of $99 101 per QALY from the health care sector perspective and an ICER of $97 977 per QALY from the societal perspective, while second-line tisagenlecleucel was dominated by SC (incremental costs of $37 803 from the health care sector and $39 480 from the societal perspective with decremental QALY of -0.02). Third-line or later tisagenlecleucel was associated with an ICER of $126 593 per QALY from the health care sector perspective and an ICER of $128 012 per QALY from the societal perspective. Based on the scenario analysis of no treatment switching, second-line axicabtagene ciloleucel yielded an ICER of $216 790 per QALY from the health care sector perspective and an ICER of $218 907 per QALY from the societal perspective, compared with SC. When accounting for patients achieving prolonged progression-free survival who would not incur progression-related costs, in this scenario ICER changed to $125 962 per QALY from the health care sector perspective and $122 931 per QALY from the societal perspective. These results were most sensitive to increased list prices of CAR T cell therapy and QALY losses associated with axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that second-line axicabtagene ciloleucel and third-line or later tisagenlecleucel were cost-effective in treating patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL at the cost-effectiveness threshold of $150 000 per QALY. However, uncertainty remains regarding the best candidates who would experience value gains from receiving CAR T cell therapy.

Cost-effectiveness of second-line axicabtagene ciloleucel in relapsed refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

The ZUMA-7 (Efficacy of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel Compared to Standard of Care Therapy in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma) study showed that axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) improved event-free survival (EFS) compared with standard of care (SOC) salvage chemoimmunotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant in primary refractory/early relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); this led to its recent US Food and Drug Administration approval in this setting. We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US adults (mean age, 65 years) with primary refractory/early relapsed DLBCL by developing a Markov model (lifetime horizon) to model the cost-effectiveness of second-line axi-cel compared with SOC using a range of plausible long-term outcomes. EFS and OS were estimated from ZUMA-7. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming a 5-year EFS of 35% with second-line axi-cel and 10% with SOC, axi-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $150 000 per QALY ($93 547 per QALY). axi-cel was no longer cost-effective if its 5-year EFS was ≤26.4% or if it cost more than $972 061 at a WTP of $150 000. Second-line axi-cel was the cost-effective strategy in 73% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo iterations at a WTP of $150 000. If the absolute benefit in EFS is maintained over time, second-line axi-cel for aggressive relapsed/refractory DLBCL is cost-effective compared with SOC at a WTP of $150 000 per QALY. However, its cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on long-term outcomes. Routine use of second-line chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy would add significantly to health care expenditures in the United States (more than $1 billion each year), even when used in a high-risk subpopulation. Further reductions in the cost of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy are needed to be affordable in many regions of the world.

Cost drivers associated with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in Japan: A structural equation model (SEM) analysis

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is an aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma of increasing prevalence in Japan. However, patients with relapsed or refractory disease to first line treatment (rrDLBCL) have been found to shoulder greater economic burden and have poor survival with subsequent lines of therapy. The relative impact of individual patient attributes on total medical cost among patients with rrDLBCL receiving second or third line (2L/3L) therapy was assessed. Structural equation modelling was used to identify potential cost drivers of total medical costs incurred by treatment and procedures in a Japanese retrospective claims database. From the database, rrDLBCL patients on 2L or 3L of treatment were grouped into respective cohorts. The mean [median] (SD) total medical cost of care for the 2L cohort was 73,296.40 [58,223.11] (58,409.79) US dollars (USD) and 75,238.35 [60,477.31] (59,583.66) USD for the 3L cohort. The largest total effect on medical cost in both cohorts was length of hospital stay (LOS) (β: 0.750 [95%CI: 0.728, 0.772] vs β: 0.762 [95%CI: 0.729, 0.794]). Length of hospital stay and potential heart disease complications due to line of treatment were the primary drivers of total cost for patients who had received at least 2L or 3L therapy for rrDLBCL.

Burden of Illness and Treatment Patterns in Second-line Large B-cell Lymphoma

PURPOSE

This study examined real-world treatment patterns with curative intent, adverse events, and health care resource utilization and costs in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) to understand the unmet medical need in the United States.

METHODS

Adult patients with ≥2 LBCL diagnoses between January 1, 2012, and March 31, 2019, were identified (index date was the date of the earliest LBCL diagnosis) from MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. Patients had ≥1 claim for any LBCL treatment, ≥6 months of data before (baseline) and ≥12 months of data after (follow-up period) the index date, and no baseline LBCL diagnosis. Treatment patterns, adverse events, and all-cause and LBCL-related health care resource utilization and costs were examined. All patients had received first-line therapy of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone with or without rituximab; etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin hydrochloride with or without rituximab; or regimens with anthracycline and second-line therapy with stem cell transplant (SCT)-intended intensive therapy or platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients who received an SCT-intended second-line regimen or received an SCT regardless of second-line regimen were considered SCT eligible.

FINDINGS

A total of 188 patients met the criteria of eligibility for SCT. Among the 119 patients who received a second-line regimen intended for SCT, only 22.7% received an SCT. Patients eligible for SCT started first-line therapy within 1 month of their LBCL index date, and the mean duration of first-line therapy was 4.1 months. The mean gap in therapy between first- and second-line therapy was 6.6 months, and the mean duration of second-line therapy was 3.0 months. During the second-line therapy treatment window (mean duration with SCT, 12.4 months; mean duration without SCT, 4.8 months), the most common regimens for patients eligible for SCT were ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide with or without rituximab and gemcitabine and oxaliplatin with or without rituximab; the top 4 most common treatment-related adverse events were febrile neutropenia (56.4%), anemia (49.5%), thrombocytopenia (42.6%), and nausea and vomiting (36.2%), which were similar regardless of receipt of SCT; mean (SD) per-patient-per-month all-cause costs were $46,174 ($49,057) for patients with SCT and $45,780 ($52,813) for patients without SCT.

IMPLICATIONS

Treatment patterns among patients with relapsed or refractory LBCL eligible for SCT were highly varied. Only 22.7% of patients who received an SCT-preparative regimen ultimately received SCT, which highlights the magnitude of unmet needs in this population. The occurrence of treatment-related adverse events was similar regardless of SCT status. Per-patient-per-month all-cause costs were also similar with upfront SCT costs averaged during a longer follow-up.

Cost-effectiveness of axicabtagene ciloleucel versus lisocabtagene maraleucel for adult patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma after two or more lines of systemic therapy in the US

AIMS

This study evaluated from a US payer perspective the cost-effectiveness of two chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell therapies, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) versus lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) following two or more systemic therapy lines.

METHODS

We developed a 3-state (i.e., pre-progression, post-progression, death) partitioned survival model to estimate patients' lifetime outcomes. Mixture cure models were used for survival extrapolation to account for long-term remission. Survival inputs were based on a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) that reweighted the ZUMA-1 population (receiving axi-cel) to match patient characteristics in TRANSCEND-NHL-001 (assessing liso-cel). Costs included apheresis, drug acquisition, and administration for conditioning chemotherapy and CAR T therapies, monitoring, transplant, hospitalization, adverse events, routine care, and terminal care, per published literature and databases. Utilities were derived from ZUMA-1 and literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

In the base case, axi-cel was associated with more QALYs (7.76 vs. 5.94) and greater costs overall ($611,440 vs. $597,174) than liso-cel, at $7,843/QALY gained. The incremental costs (+$14,266) were largely driven by higher routine care costs (+$18,596) due to longer survival and hospitalization (+$10,993) but partially offset by reduced costs of CAR T acquisition (‒$11,300) and terminal care (‒$4,025). Sensitivity analyses consistently suggested robustness of base-case results.

LIMITATIONS

This study relied on an MAIC in which trial design differences and unobserved confounders could not be accounted for. Future real-world studies for recently approved CAR T are warranted to validate our results. Due to a lack of data, we assumed equivalent use of transplants and treatment for B-cell aplasia between the two therapies based on clinicians' opinions.

CONCLUSIONS

In the US, axi-cel is a potentially cost-effective treatment option compared with liso-cel for adult patients with r/r LBCL after two or more systemic therapy lines.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Tisagenlecleucel for the Treatment of Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the United States

PURPOSE

To assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-effective price of tisagenlecleucel, a novel, effective chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, versus salvage chemotherapy (SC) for the treatment of relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (r/r DLBCL) using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from a US third-party payer's perspective.

METHODS

A three-state (progression-free survival, progressive disease, and death), responder-based partitioned survival model with a lifetime horizon and 3% annual discount rate was developed. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival of tisagenlecleucel were estimated separately for patients with and without an overall response (OR), using data from JULIET ( Study of Efficacy and Safety of CTL019 in Adult DLBCL Patients). OS of SC was informed by SCHOLAR-1 (Retrospective Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Research). Mixture cure models were used to inform the survival of tisagenlecleucel responders, supported by JULIET. The median OS was 11.1 months in all tisagenlecleucel-treated patients but not reached for responders; no progression or death occurred among responders since month 22 of treatment. For tisagenlecleucel nonresponders and SC, survival was based on standard parametric models until month 60and the survival of DLBCL long-term survivors thereafter. The model prediction validated well against the observed trial data. Costs and utilities were from the literature; utilities depended on health states and were used to estimate QALYs. Total costs, QALYs, and incremental cost per QALY gained were estimated. A cost-effective price range was estimated for all tisagenlecleucel-treated patients, OR responders, and complete response (CR) responders. Deterministic sensitivity and scenario analyses and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed. All costs were reported in or inflated to 2020 US dollars.

FINDINGS

Tisagenlecleucel was associated with 3.35 QALYs gained versus SC.,The estimated incremental costs per QALY gained versus SC were $78,652 using the wholesale acquisition cost of $373,000 for tisagenlecleucel. The estimated cost-effective price of tisagenlecleucel in all treated patients was $612,270 at the WTP threshold of $150,000. Tisagenlecleucel OR and CR responders had an increase of 7.82 and 9.34 QALYs versus SC, with cost-effective prices estimated at $1,281,456 and $1,551,974, respectively. Sensitivity analysis results supported the base case findings.

IMPLICATIONS

Tisagenlecleucel is a cost-effective treatment versus SC for r/r DLBCL from the perspective of a US third-party payer. The estimated cost-effective prices ranged from $612,270 (all tisagenlecleucel-treated patients) to up to $1.5 million (patients achieving CR). Limitations include the use of single-arm trials due to data availability. (Clin Ther. 2021;43:XXX-XXX) © 2021 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses of tisagenlecleucel in adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma from Singapore's private insurance payer's perspective

BACKGROUND

Patients experiencing relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (r/r DLBCL) have limited treatment options and poor prognosis. Tisagenlecleucel (TIS) has shown improved clinical outcomes, but at a high upfront cost. Singapore has a multi-payer healthcare system where private insurance is one of the major payers. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of TIS against salvage chemotherapy regimen (SCR) for treating r/r DLBCL patients who have failed ≥2 lines of systemic therapy from Singapore's private insurance payer's perspective.

METHODS

Over a life-time horizon, a partitioned survival model with three health-states was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TIS vs. SCR with or without hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Efficacy inputs for TIS and SCR were based on 43 months of observation data from pooled JULIET and UPenn trials, and CORAL extension studies respectively. Direct costs for pre-treatment, treatment, adverse events, follow-up, subsequent-HSCT, relapse, and terminal care were included. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated as the total incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Additionally, the financial implication of introducing TIS in Singapore from a private payer's perspective was analyzed, comparing the current treatment pathway (without TIS) with a future scenario (with TIS) over 5 years.

RESULTS

Compared with SCR, TIS was the dominant option, with cost savings of S$8,477 alongside an additional gain of 2.78 QALYs in privately insured patients who shifted from private to public hospitals for TIS treatment. Scenario analyses for patients starting in public hospitals show ICERs of S$99,623 (no subsidy) and S$133,261 (50% subsidy for SCR treatment, no subsidy for TIS), supporting the base case. The projected annual budget impact ranges from S$850,000 to S$3.4 million during the first 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

TIS for treating r/r DLBCL patients who have failed ≥2 lines of systemic therapies, is likely to be cost effective with limited budget impact.

US cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin, bendamustine and rituximab in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin (pola) + bendamustine + rituximab (BR) in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma based on the GO29365 trial from a US payer's perspective. Materials & methods: A partitioned survival model used progression-free survival and overall survival data from the GO29365 trial. The base case analysis assumed overall survival was informed by progression-free survival; a mixture cure model estimated proportion of long-term survivors. Results: In the base case, pola + BR was cost-effective versus BR at US$35,864 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses showed that the findings were robust. Conclusion: Pola + BR is cost-effective versus BR for the treatment of transplant-ineligible relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the US.

Estimation of total costs in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma receiving tisagenlecleucel from a US hospital's perspective

Aims: This study estimated the total costs associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment in adult patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) based on the JULIET trial from a United States hospital's perspective.Methods: An economic model was developed to assess the total costs associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment (from leukapheresis to two months post-infusion) in adults (aged ≥18 years) with r/r DLBCL using a fee-for-service approach. Costs were considered during the pre-treatment, tisagenlecleucel infusion, and follow-up periods, and were estimated based on the health resource utilization and safety data from the JULIET trial. Cost components included leukapheresis, lymphodepleting chemotherapy, tisagenlecleucel infusion/administration, inpatient and intensive care unit (ICU) admission, medical professional visits, lab tests/procedures, and management of adverse events (AEs). The base-case model estimated the total costs using observed hospitalization, ICU, and AE data from JULIET, while scenario analyses varied key assumptions related to AEs and hospitalization.Results: The estimated overall cost associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment from leukapheresis to two months post-infusion was $437,927/patient, of which $64,784 (14.8%) was additional to tisagenlecleucel's list price ($373,000) and the associated administration cost ($143). The top three key drivers of the additional cost were AE management ($30,594; 47.2%), inpatient/ICU not attributed to AEs ($24,285; 37.5%), and lab tests/procedures ($5,443; 8.4%). In the scenario analyses, total costs ranged from $382,702 (no AEs, no hospitalization) to $469,006 (cytokine release syndrome and B-cell aplasia, hospitalization).Limitations: This analysis was limited to two months of follow-up after tisagenlecleucel infusion, which cannot capture long-term safety outcomes associated with the treatment and may underestimate AE costs.Conclusions: The total cost of tisagenlecleucel administration from leukapheresis to two months was estimated at $437,927. In addition to tisagenlecleucel's price, the main drivers were AE management costs and inpatient/ICU costs. Future studies based on real-world, long-term use of tisagenlecleucel are warranted.

Cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

A recent phase II trial showed that use of polatuzumab vedotin in combination with bendamustine plus rituximab (Pola-BR) in transplant-ineligible patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) resulted in longer progression-free survival and overall survival compared to bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) alone. In this study, we constructed a Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of Pola-BR versus BR in transplant-ineligible R/R DLBCL. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of each treatment strategy from a US payer perspective, using a lifetime horizon and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Use of Pola-BR was associated with an incremental cost of $92,641 compared to BR alone ($200,905 vs $108,265, respectively), an incremental effectiveness of 1.76 QALYs (2.35 vs 0.59 QALYs, respectively), and an ICER of $52,519/QALY. These data suggest that use of Pola-BR for R/R DLBCL is likely to be cost-effective compared to BR alone.

Cost burden of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Introduction: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common non-Hodgkin lymphoma and is a clinically heterogeneous disease. Treatment pathways for DLBCL are diverse and integrate established and novel therapies.Areas covered: We review the cost burden of DLBCL and the cost-effectiveness of DLBCL management including precision and cellular medicine. We utilized Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords to search the National Library of Medicine online MEDLINE database (PubMed) for articles related to cost, cost burden, and cost-of-illness of DLBCL and cost-effectiveness of DLBCL management strategies published in English as of June 2019.Expert commentary: Available and developing DLBCL therapies offer improved outcomes and often curative treatment at considerable financial expense, and the total cost burden for DLBCL management is substantial for patients and the healthcare system. In the era of personalized medicine, CAR T cells and targeted therapies provide exciting avenues for current and future DLBCL care and can further increase treatment cost. Determinations of cost and cost-effectiveness in DLBCL treatment pathways should continue to guide care providers and systems in identifying cost reduction strategies to provide appropriate therapies to the greatest number of patients in treating DLBCL.

Cost Effectiveness of Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Multiply Relapsed or Refractory Adult Large B-Cell Lymphoma

PURPOSE

Two anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies are approved for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel; each costs $373,000. We evaluated their cost effectiveness.

METHODS

We used a decision analytic Markov model informed by recent multicenter, single-arm trials to evaluate axi-cel and tisagenlecleucel in multiply relapsed/refractory, adult, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma from a US health payer perspective over a lifetime horizon. Under a range of plausible long-term effectiveness assumptions, each therapy was compared with salvage chemoimmunotherapy regimens and stem-cell transplantation. Main outcomes were undiscounted life years, discounted lifetime costs, discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (3% annual discount rate). Sensitivity analyses explored uncertainty.

RESULTS

In an optimistic scenario, assuming a 40% 5-year progression-free survival (PFS), axi-cel increased life expectancy by 8.2 years at $129,000/QALY gained (95% uncertainty interval, $90,000 to $219,000). At a 30% 5-year PFS, improvements in life expectancy were more modest (6.4 years) and expensive ($159,000/QALY gained [95% uncertainty interval, $105,000 to $284,000]). In an optimistic scenario, assuming a 35% 5-year PFS, tisagenlecleucel increased life expectancy by 4.6 years at $168,000/QALY gained (95% uncertainty interval, $105,000 to $414,000/QALY). At a 25% 5-year PFS, improvements in life expectancy were smaller (3.4 years) and more expensive ($223,000/QALY gained [95% uncertainty interval, $123,000 to $1,170,000/QALY]). Administering CAR-T to all indicated patients would increase US health care costs by approximately $10 billion over 5 years. Price reductions to $250,000 and $200,000, respectively, or payment only for initial complete response (at current prices) would allow axi-cel and tisagenlecleucel to cost less than $150,000/QALY, even at 25% PFS.

CONCLUSION

At 2018 prices, it is possible that both CAR-T therapies meet a less than $150,000/QALY threshold. This depends on long-term outcomes compared with chemoimmunotherapy and stem-cell transplantation, which are uncertain. Widespread adoption would substantially increase non-Hodgkin lymphoma health care costs. Price reductions or payment for initial response would improve cost effectiveness, even with modest long-term outcomes.