Nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for advanced gastric, gastroesophageal junction, and esophageal adenocarcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy versus placebo combined with chemotherapy for HER2-negative advanced gastric cancer in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy for HER2-negative advanced gastric cancer in China.

METHODS

A partitioned survival approach model was constructed to simulate the progression of HER2-negative advanced gastric cancer and evaluate the outcomes of different treatment strategies. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) to assess the cost associated with each quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess robustness and reliability.

RESULTS

The analysis conducted in the base case demonstrated that the ICER associated with pembrolizumab was $177405.83/QALY gained in all population. In the subgroup analysis, it was found that individuals with a PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 and those with a PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10 had ICERs of $152397.06/QALY and $109534.13/QALY, respectively. All ICER values for both the all population groups and the subgroups exceeded the WTP threshold in China. Our analysis shows the robustness of these results, as they remained consistent when input parameters were varied within a ± 25% range.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this cost-effectiveness analysis suggest that pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy is not a cost-effective treatment option for HER2-negative advanced gastric cancer in China.

Cost-utility of sintilimab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy as first-line treatment of advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer in China

OBJECTIVES

ORIENT-16, a phase III clinical trial conducted at 62 hospitals in China, reported that add-on sintilimab (Sin) to chemotherapy (Chemo) had favorable efficacy (p < 0.05) for patients with advanced HER2-negative gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC). This study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of the Sin+Chemo based on results of ORIENT-16 from the perspective of Chinese healthcare payers.

METHODS

A three-state partitioned survival model was developed to simulate the 10-year life expectancy and total healthcare costs for patients with advanced HER2-negative GC/GEJC. Primary measure outcomes were: cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs). Sensitivity/scenario analyses were conducted to assess the model robustness.

RESULTS

In all patients, Sin+Chemo vs Chemo increased costs by $6,472, additionally providing 0.61 QALYs, resulting in an ICUR of $10,610/QALY. While, in PD-L1 combined positive score ≥ 5 cohort, the ICUR was $9,738/QALYs. The ICUR was most sensitive to the utility of progression-free survival. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that add-on Sin had a 100% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $18,625/QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Sin+Chemo is a cost-effective first-line treatment option for advanced HER2-negative GC/GEJC in China.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ORIENT-16, www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier is NCT03745170.

Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer Management: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Across the nation, patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) are managed with modalities including upfront surgery (US) and perioperative chemotherapy (PCT). Preoperative therapies have demonstrated survival benefits over US and thus long-term outcomes are expected to vary between the options. However, as these 2 modalities continue to be regularly employed, we sought to perform a decision analysis comparing the costs and quality-of-life associated with the treatment of patients with LAGC to identify the most cost-effective option. We designed a decision tree model to investigate the survival and costs associated with the most commonly utilized management modalities for LAGC in the United States: US and PCT. The tree described costs and treatment strategies over a 6-month time horizon. Costs were derived from 2022 Medicare reimbursement rates using the third-party payer perspective for physicians and hospitals. Effectiveness was represented using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). One-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were utilized to test the robustness of our findings. PCT was the most cost-effective treatment modality for patients with LAGC over US with a cost of $40,792.16 yielding 3.11 QALYs. US has a cost of $55,575.57 while yielding 3.15 QALYs; the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $369,585.25. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses favored PCT in all variations of variables across their standard deviations. Across 100,000 Monte Carlo simulations, 100% of trials favored PCT. In our model simulating patients with LAGC, the most cost-effective treatment strategy was PCT. While US demonstrated improved QALYs over PCT, the associated cost was too great to justify its use.