Economic evaluation of adverse events of dabrafenib plus trametinib versus nivolumab in patients with advanced BRAF-mutant cutaneous melanoma for adjuvant therapy in Germany

Adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib for patients with resected BRAF -mutated melanoma: DESCRIBE-AD real-world retrospective observational study

BRAF and MEK inhibitor, dabrafenib plus trametinib, adjuvant therapy is effective for high-risk resected melanoma patients with BRAF - V600 mutations. However, real-world evidence is limited. We aimed to determine the feasibility of this therapy in routine clinical practice. DESCRIBE-AD, a retrospective observational study, collected real-world data from 25 hospitals in Spain. Histologically confirmed and resected BRAF -mutated melanoma patients aged ≥18 years who were previously treated with dabrafenib plus trametinib adjuvant therapy, were included. The primary objectives were treatment discontinuation rate and time to discontinuation. The secondary objectives included safety and efficacy. From October 2020 to March 2021, 65 patients were included. Dabrafenib and trametinib discontinuation rate due to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade was 9%. Other reasons for discontinuation included patients' decisions (6%), physician decisions (6%), unrelated adverse events (3%), disease progression (5%), and others (5%). The median time to treatment discontinuation was 9 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 5-11]. G3-4 TRAEs occurred in 21.5% of patients, the most common being pyrexia (3%), asthenia (3%), and diarrhoea (3%). Unscheduled hospitalisations and clinical tests occurred in 6 and 22% of patients, respectively. After 20-month median follow-up (95% CI, 18-22), 9% of patients had exitus due to disease progression, with a 12-month relapse-free survival and overall survival rates of 95.3% and 100%, respectively. Dabrafenib and trametinib adjuvant therapy proved effective for melanoma patients in a real-world setting, with a manageable toxicity profile. Toxicity frequencies were low leading to low incidence of unscheduled medical visits, tests, and treatment discontinuations.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Abemaciclib plus Fulvestrant versus Placebo plus Fulvestrant in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive, ERBB2-Negative Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Abemaciclib is a selective and potent small-molecule inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4 and CDK6) which is administered orally. Compared to placebo plus fulvestrant (PF), abemaciclib plus fulvestrant (AF) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). However, an economic evaluation of these two treatments is currently lacking. The purpose of this article was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the two treatments for HR*, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) in the USA.

METHODS

A Markov simulation model was constructed using data from a published clinical trial (MONARCH 2). The two simulated treatment strategies included AF or PF. Costs were obtained from the clinical trials and the website, and utility was derived from the published literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to compare the two treatment strategies.

RESULTS

The total costs were USD 400,377.43 and USD 89,937.77 for AF and PF treatment, respectively. The AF treatment produced 2.09 long-term quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the PF treatment produced 1.08 QALYs. Hence, patients who received AF treatment spent an additional USD 310,439.66 and generated an increase of 1.01 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of USD 307,366 per QALY. At current prices, AF was not cost-effective assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of USD 150,000 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

Despite significant gains in PFS over AF, it is not a cost-effective treatment for HR*, HER2- ABC in the USA at current drug prices.

Cost-Effectiveness of PD-L1 Testing in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Using In Vitro Diagnostic (IVD) Versus Laboratory-Developed Test (LDT)

INTRODUCTION

Accurate PD-L1 testing for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) maximizes the benefits of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) drugs like pembrolizumab. False negative test results deny ICI treatments to eligible patients, worsening clinical and economic outcomes, while false positives increase costs by using ICI treatments without their benefits. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of PD-L1 testing with an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) compared to a laboratory-developed test (LDT) for allocating patients with NSCLC to treatment with either pembrolizumab or chemotherapy using the German healthcare system as a model.

METHODS

We developed a decision analytical model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PD-L1 testing with a regulatory body approved IVD compared to an LDT from the national German healthcare payer (statutory health insurance system) perspective. Accuracy of PD-L1 testing was based on data from two independent proficiency testing programs. The 1-year model was based on outcomes data from the KEYNOTE-024 clinical trial and treatment patterns reflecting current German practices.

RESULTS

IVDs produced accurate PD-L1 testing results in 93% (752/811) of tested cases compared to 73% (492/672) with LDTs. Most misclassifications concerned false negatives, occurring in 21% of LDTs vs 7% of IVDs. Total costs of the IVD group (48,878 €) were 196 € higher than the LDT group (48,682 €). These costs incorporate testing, first- and second-line therapy, managing treatment-related grade 3+ adverse events (AEs), and end-of-life costs for those who died within the year. Total effectiveness (percentage of patients successfully diagnosed and prescribed the correct therapy per German treatment guidelines) was 19 percentage points higher for the IVD group (88%) compared to the LDT group (69%). These differences in costs and effects lead to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 1057 €.

CONCLUSION

Compared to LDT technology, on-label IVD use for PD-L1 testing is only slightly more costly and substantially more effective for aligning patients with PD-L1-positive NSCLC with ICI therapy according to German practice guidelines. Given these findings, changes to testing and reimbursement policies may be considered to maximize patient outcomes in NSCLC.

Adjuvant treatment of high-risk melanoma - cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment options for BRAF 600 mutated tumors

INTRODUCTION

Until recently, adjuvant treatment options for higher stage resectable cutaneous melanoma were limited. Two studies with a similar set-up, published 2017, led to registration of targeted therapy for BRAF-mutated melanoma with dabrafenib and trametinib as well as of the immunotherapy with nivolumab irrespective of BRAF-mutation status. Both options have been positively assessed in Germany since 2019 for the adjuvant treatment of BRAF-V600 mutated melanoma. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of both treatment alternatives (dabrafenib/trametinib and nivolumab) against observation as a comparative therapy from the perspective of German statutory health funds.

METHODS

Partitioned survival analysis based on published survival curves for the investigated treatment options was used for a cohort model for the health states relapse free survival, progression, and death. The partitioned survival analysis approach was based on the survival curves published for the key studies Combi AD and Checkmate-238. The modelling was performed for the remaining lifetime for a cohort with starting age of 50 years. For extrapolation of the survival curves, convergence to general population mortality rates was assumed in the long term. Within the progression state, a Markov model uses three levels of progressions (locoregional, distant metastases with 1st and 2nd line treatment). Lifetime treatment costs were calculated using the German statutory health fund reimbursement scheme. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) associated to the health states were adopted from previously published utilities based on the Combi AD study.

RESULTS

The treatment with dabrafenib/trametinib yielded an increase in quality adjusted life years of 2.28 QALY at an incremental lifetime cost of 86.1 T€. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio of dabrafenib/trametinib and nivolumab was comparable with 37.8 T€/QALY and 30.0 T€/QALY, respectively. Several sensitivity analyses proved the result to be insensitive. General model parameters like discount rate and length of the time horizon had stronger influence. For nivolumab, the model showed lower discounted lifetime costs (118.1 T€) compared to dabrafenib/trametinib [155.1 T€], associated with a lower gain in QALYs (1.64 years) compared to observation.

CONCLUSION

Both dabrafenib/trametinib and nivolumab turned out to be cost effective within internationally accepted Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) thresholds with comparable cost effectiveness ratios.

Novel Allosteric Inhibitors of Deoxyhypusine Synthase against Malignant Melanoma: Design, Synthesis, and Biological Evaluation

Based on the novel allosteric site of deoxyhypusine synthase (DHPS), two series of 30 novel 5-(2-methoxyphenoxy)-2-phenylpyrimidin-4-amine derivatives as DHPS inhibitors were designed and synthesized. Among them, compound 8m, with the best DHPS inhibitory potency (IC50 = 0.014 μM), exhibited excellent inhibition against melanoma cells, which was superior to that of GC7. Besides, molecular docking and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations further proved that compound 8m was tightly bound to the allosteric site of DHPS. Flow cytometric analysis and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) showed that compound 8m could inhibit the intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) level. Furthermore, by western blot analysis, compound 8m effectively activated caspase 3 and decreased the expressions of GP-100, tyrosinase, eIF5A2, MMP2, and MMP9. Moreover, both Transwell analysis and wound healing analysis showed that compound 8m could inhibit the invasion and migration of melanoma cells. In the in vivo study, the tumor xenograft model showed that compound 8m effectively inhibited melanoma development with low toxicity.