Duration of immunotherapy in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma with negative driver genes: case report and literature review

Cost-Utility Analysis of Camrelizumab Plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone as a First-Line Treatment for Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in China

Purpose

To evaluate the cost utility of camrelizumab plus standard chemotherapy versus standard chemotherapy alone as a first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the perspective of the Chinese health care system and to provide a reference for health decision-making.

Methods

A Markov model consisting of three health states was designed to evaluate the cost utility of these two treatment regimens for NSCLC patients with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) as the primary output indicator. Clinical data were derived from a published phase III clinical trial (CameL; ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03134872). One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the model uncertainty.

Results

Base case analysis showed that the ICER of camrelizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone was $43,275.43 per QALY. It was higher than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $31,510.57 per QALY in China, which has a standard of three times the GDP per capita recommended by the WHO. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the utility value of PFS had the greatest influence on the results, and the other sensitive parameters were the cost of subsequent second-line therapy in the two group, the pemetrexed price, the cost of adverse event management and the utility value of PD. The probability sensitivity analysis showed that the probabilities of the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus standard chemotherapy were 27.1%, 66.7% and 88.0% when the WTP values were $40,000, $50,000 and $60,000 per QALY, respectively.

Conclusions

Taking three times the GDP per capita in China as the WTP threshold, the camrelizumab plus standard chemotherapy regimen does not have a cost-effectiveness advantage compared with the standard chemotherapy regimen alone as a first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC.

Defining unique clinical hallmarks for immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapies

Introduction

Immuno-oncology therapies, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), have transformed cancer care and have brought into question whether classic oncology efficacy assessments adequately describe the distinctive responses observed with these agents. With more ICI-based therapies being approved across multiple tumor types, it is essential to define unique clinical hallmarks of these agents and their associated assessments to better reflect the therapeutic impact for both patients and physicians. Long-term survival and objective responses, such as depth and durability of responses, treatment-free survival, efficacy in brain metastases, improved health-related quality of life, and unique safety profiles, are among the hallmarks that have emerged for ICI therapies. An established clinical hallmark is a sustained long-term survival, as evidenced by a delayed separation of Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and a plateau at ~3 years. Combination ICI therapies provide the opportunity to raise this plateau, thereby affording durable survival benefits to more patients. Deepening of responses over time is a unique clinical ICI hallmark, with patients responding long term and with more durable complete responses. Depth of response has demonstrated prognostic value for long-term survival in some cancers, and several ICI studies have shown sustained responses even after discontinuing ICI therapy, offering the potential for treatment-free intervals. Although clinical evidence supporting efficacy in brain metastases is limited, favorable ICI intracranial responses have been seen that are largely concordant with extracranial responses. While patient outcomes can be significantly improved with ICIs, they are associated with unique immune-mediated adverse reactions (IMARs), including delayed ICI toxicities, and may require multidisciplinary management for optimal care. Interestingly, patients discontinuing ICIs for IMARs may maintain responses similar to patients who did not discontinue for an IMAR, whether they restarted ICI therapy or not.

Conclusion

Herein, we comprehensively review and refine the clinical hallmarks uniquely associated with ICI therapies, which not only will rejuvenate our assessment of ICI therapeutic outcomes but also will lead to a greater appreciation of the effectiveness of ICI therapies.

Recent updates on Sintilimab in solid tumor immunotherapy

In recent years, there have been advancements in traditional patterns of tumor therapy with the adoption of immunotherapy. Its application with or without other combined regimens has attracted attention from clinicians. Sintilimab (Tyvyt®), a highly selective fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody, blocks the binding site of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), thereby, inhibiting the interaction between PD-1 and its ligands (PD-L1/2) to restore the endogenous anti-tumor T cell responses. Sintilimab has been proven to be clinically beneficial in multiple solid tumor therapies. Combination therapy and monotherapy have shown potential and encouraging anti-tumor efficacy with controllable and acceptable toxicities. The combination therapy is more likely to be a novel and promising therapeutic option. This study provides an overview of the status of sintilimab-based clinical trials in various solid tumors.

Sintilimab: A Promising Anti-Tumor PD-1 Antibody

Sintilimab (Tyvyt®) is a monoclonal antibody against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). It could block the interaction between PD-1 and its ligands and help the anti-tumor effect of T-cells to recover. Sintilimab is developed by Innovent Biologics and Eli Lilly and Company and has been approved to treat relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma in patients who have undergone two or more lines of systemic chemotherapy by the National Medical Products Administration of China. Recently, sintilimab has been reported in plenty of literature and shows satisfying anti-tumor effect. Meanwhile, there are some reports showing its side effects. Overall, sintilimab has similar anti-tumor effects and a better safety profile compared to nivolumab and pembrolizumab in Hodgkin lymphoma, natural killer/T cell lymphoma and advanced non-small cell lung cancer. In this review, we aim to briefly describe the mechanisms, pharmacological characteristics, anti-tumor effects, predictive parameters of efficacy and side effects of sintilimab, providing valuable information of sintilimab for decision-making in the treatment of tumors in the future.