Brentuximab vedotin in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma post-autologous stem cell transplant: a cost-effectiveness analysis in Scotland

Cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin compared with conventional chemotherapy for relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma in China

BACKGROUND

Relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma (RRcHL) associates with poor prognosis and heavy disease burden to patients. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin (BV) in comparison to conventional chemotherapy in patients with RRcHL, from a Chinese healthcare perspective.

METHODS

The lifetime cost and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated through a partitioned survival model with three health states (progression free, post progression, and death). Two cohorts for each BV arm and chemotherapy arm were built, representing patients with and without transplant after BV or chemotherapy, respectively. Clinical parameters were retrieved from BV trials and the literature. Resource utilization data were mainly collected from local expert surveys and cost parameters were reflecting local unit prices. Utility values were sourced from the literature. A discount rate of 5% was employed according to the Chinese guideline. A series of deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness and uncertainty associated with the model.

RESULTS

Results of the base case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for BV versus chemotherapy was $2,867 (¥19,774). The main model driver was the superior progression-free and overall survival benefits of BV. The ICERs were relatively robust in a series of sensitivity analyses, all under a conventional decision threshold (1 time of Chinese per capita GDP). With this conventional threshold, the probability of BV being cost-effective was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Brentuximab vedotin can be considered a cost-effective treatment versus conventional chemotherapy in treating relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma in China.

Cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin in Hodgkin lymphoma: a systematic review

PURPOSE

This study aimed to systematically review and critically appraise cost-effectiveness studies on Brentuximab vedotin (BV) in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL).

METHODS

The PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science core collection, and Embase databases were searched until July 3, 2022. We included published full economic evaluation studies on BV for treating patients with HL. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) checklist. Meanwhile, we used qualitative synthesis to analyze the findings. We converted the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) to the value of the US dollar in 2022.

RESULTS

Eight economic evaluations met the study's inclusion criteria. The results of three studies that compared BV plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (BV + AVD) front-line therapy with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vincristine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) showed that BV is unlikely to be cost-effective as a front-line treatment in patients advanced stage (III or IV) HL. Four studies investigated the cost-effectiveness of BV in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) HL after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). BV was not cost-effective in the reviewed studies at accepted thresholds. In addition, the adjusted ICERs ranged from $65,382 to $374,896 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The key drivers of cost-effectiveness were medication costs, hazard ratio for BV, and utilities.

CONCLUSION

Available economic evaluations show that using BV as front-line treatment or consolidation therapy is not cost-effective based on specific ICER thresholds for patients with HL or R/R HL. To decide on this orphan drug, we should consider other factors such as existence of alternative treatment options, clinical benefits, and disease burden.

A systematic literature review of the epidemiology, quality of life, and economic burden, including disease pathways and treatment patterns of relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma

INTRODUCTION

A systematic literature review was conducted to understand disease burden in patients with relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R cHL).

AREAS COVERED

Embase®, PubMed®, and Cochrane were searched for records from 2001 to 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A total of 13,257 abstracts and 1731 papers were screened; 144 studies were identified. cHL accounted for 0.5% of all cancers, with 4‒66.7% of cases progressing to R/R disease (studies with >500 patients); this range varied across countries. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed via EORTC-QLQ-C30 (n = 7), EQ-5D (n = 5), SF-36 (n = 3), FACIT-F (n = 1), and MFI (n = 1) questionnaires. In general, pembrolizumab and other programmed cell death protein-1 inhibitors improved QoL scores. Brentuximab vedotin showed mixed outcomes, and high-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous stem-cell rescue (ASCR) showed worsening functionality/symptoms. Economic burden studies (n = 21) reported increased costs and health care resource in R/R cHL. Across clinical guidelines (n = 13) and treatment pattern studies (n = 46), HDT followed by ASCR was recommended as initial R/R cHL treatment. Pembrolizumab and nivolumab were frequently recommended for patients relapsing following HDT/ASCR.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite recent treatment advances, patients with R/R cHL continue to report reduced quality of life. Unmet medical needs remain, particularly with respect to slowing disease progression and identifying the best treatment approaches for improving longer-term survival and quality of life. This systematic literature review provides an extensive overview of the current landscape in patients with R/R cHL, focusing on four key areas: epidemiology, QoL, economic burden, and disease management. These findings will be useful to those with an interest in managing patients with R/R cHL or in designing future studies.

Cost-effectiveness and drug wastage of immunotherapeutic agents for hematologic malignancies: a systematic review

Introduction: Novel immunotherapeutic agents (e.g. monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, bispecific T-cell engagers) as treatment options for hematologic malignancies continue to emerge. These agents have been used as the standard of care in specific disease states and are associated with high costs. Value assessment of these therapies is of critical importance for coverage and reimbursement decision-making.Areas covered: We identified 15 immunotherapeutic agents through the U.S. FDA approvals for hematologic malignancies until 2018 and systematically reviewed related cost-effectiveness studies. Additionally, we examined whether drug wastage was accounted for in these studies.Expert opinion: We reviewed 51 studies for 14 identified immunotherapeutic agents that met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Three studies were observational-based, one study was model-based and incorporated observational data. The remaining studies were model-based with the majority of the model parameters extracted from randomized control trials (RCTs). Among 43 model-based economic evaluations, 13 studies accounted for drug wastage. Most of the studies showed favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of immunotherapeutic agents-containing regimens when compared with no immunotherapeutic agents-containing regimens. Alemtuzumab, brentuximab vedotin, and daratumumab were not considered cost-effective across all the studies. Further investigations are warranted to establish the value of recent immunotherapeutic agents for hematologic malignancies.

Impact of imaging modality on clinical outcome in Hodgkin lymphoma in a resource constraint setting

Treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) has evolved with risk-stratified therapy based on PET-CT scan at multiple timepoints. In a resource constraint setting even a single PET-CT scan ($400) is inaccessible to many patients, who are re-assessed with only clinical examination, abdominal ultrasonogram and/or x-ray (C/U/X) ($10). To compare clinical outcomes in patients with HL who have had suboptimal imaging after completion of chemotherapy for HL, with those who had a CT or PET-CT, 283 patients were treated for HL from 2011 to 2015, and 268 patients completed six cycles of ABVD therapy with response assessment modality by CT/PET in 185 patients and by C/U/X in 83. There was no difference in the number of patients with advanced (64·1% vs. 61·1%; P = 0·650) or bulk disease (8·1% vs. 7·2%). A significantly higher number of patients in the CT/PET group received IFRT (25·4% vs. 7·7%; P = 0·0005). The three-year overall survival and progression-free survival of all treated patients (n = 283) was 83·5 ± 2·3% and 76·7 ± 2·6% respectively [median follow-up 36 months (range 2-93)]. At three years, the overall relapse-free survival (RFS) was 80·1 ± 2·5%, with RFS of 77 ± 3·2% vs. 85 ± 4·0% in the CT/PET group and C/U/X groups respectively (P = 0·349). There was no difference in RFS between the two groups either in early-stage disease (88·1 ± 4·6% vs. 91·8 ± 5·6%; P = 0·671) or late-stage disease (73·9 ± 4·8% vs. 81·3 ± 6·0%; P = 0·747). The only significant factor adversely affecting RFS was advanced disease (P = 0·004). Factors not affecting RFS were age (P = 0·763), sex (P = 0·925), bulk disease (P = 0·889) and imaging modality (P = 0·352). There was no difference in relapse rates between patients who had suboptimal imaging compared to those who had a PET/CT. It is possible to use these basic imaging modalities when resources are a constraint, with acceptable outcomes.

Brentuximab vedotin for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma after autologous stem cell transplantation

Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is the first approved novel agent for salvage treatment of relapsed or refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). In this study, a literature-based analysis was undertaken to assess, via an indirect treatment comparison, the comparative efficacy of BV to salvage chemotherapy as treatment for R/R cHL patients following ASCT. This comparative effectiveness research was undertaken to support a reimbursement submission for BV to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Retrospective analysis of individual patient data from four data sources demonstrated that the use of BV as first salvage treatment in cHL patients relapsing or progressing post-ASCT achieved improvements in both clinical response and overall survival. More specifically, BV was associated with an incremental improvement of 22% in overall response rate compared to salvage chemotherapy. Five-year overall survival and progression-free survival rates were 92·2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 85·5-99·3%] and 32·2% (95% CI: 19·1-54·6%) respectively for BV, compared to 30·5% (95% CI: 22·2-42·0%) and 3·2% (95% CI: 1·1-8·9%) respectively for salvage chemotherapy. The encouraging results from this conservative analysis have the potential to support informed clinical management and funding decisions for the first salvage of cHL patients demonstrating recurrence after ASCT.