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

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel versus Tisagenlecleucel in the Treatment of Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma Based on a Real-World French Registry

INTRODUCTION

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) are chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies that were evaluated in third and later line (3L+) relapsed or refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in the ZUMA-1 and JULIET trials, respectively. As of October 2021, the DESCAR-T registry included 729 French patients with 3L+ r/r DLBCL who received axi-cel or tisa-cel. Using these data, propensity score matching was used to conduct an adjusted comparison between axi-cel and tisa-cel. Axi-cel was associated with statistically significant improvements in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and significantly more frequent Grade ≥ 3 immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), compared with tisa-cel. There was no significant difference in Grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS). The current analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of axi-cel versus tisa-cel in the treatment of 3L+ r/r DLBCL using propensity score-matched data from the DESCAR-T registry.

METHODS

A partitioned survival model was used to extrapolate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a lifetime. Survival curves for PFS and OS were based on independent mixture cure models fitted to digitized Kaplan-Meier data for the propensity score-matched DESCAR-T populations. Average duration of intensive care unit stays for each of axi-cel and tisa-cel in DESCAR-T were used to inform adverse event costs. Selected parametric survival distributions were based on clinical expert validation. Utility values were derived from ZUMA-1, and costs were obtained from French registries and published sources. List prices were used for both axi-cel and tisa-cel. Costs and outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 2.5%.

RESULTS

Axi-cel is associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €15,520 per QALY compared with tisa-cel.

CONCLUSION

Based on explicit willingness-to-pay thresholds applied in Europe, axi-cel is expected to be a cost-effective use of healthcare resources in real-world clinical settings compared with tisa-cel in 3L+ r/r DLBCL.

Allogeneic CAR-T cells for cancer immunotherapy

Autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified T (CAR-T) cell therapy has displayed high efficacy in the treatment of hematological malignancies. Up to now, 11 autologous CAR-T cell products have been approved for the management of malignancies globally. However, the application of autologous CAR-T cell therapy has many individual limitations, long time-consuming, highly cost, and the risk of manufacturing failure. Indeed, some patients would not benefit from autologous CAR-T cell products because of rapid disease progression. Allogeneic CAR-T cells especially universal CAR-T (U-CAR-T) cell therapy are superior to these challenges of autologous CAR-T cells. In this review, we describe basic study and clinical trials of U-CAR-T cell therapeutic methods for malignancies. In addition, we summarize the problems encountered and potential solutions.

Advances in biology, diagnosis and treatment of DLBCL

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with approximately 150,000 new cases worldwide each year, represent nearly 30% of all cases of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and are phenotypically and genetically heterogeneous. A gene-expression profile (GEP) has identified at least three major subtypes of DLBCL, each of which has distinct clinical, biological, and genetic features: activated B-cell (ABC)-like DLBCL, germinal-center B-cell (GCB)-like DLBCL, and unclassified. Different origins are associated with different responses to chemotherapy and targeted agents. Despite DLBCL being a highly heterogeneous disease, more than 60% of patients with DLBCL can be cured after using rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) to inhibit the growth of cancer cells while targeting the CD20 receptor. In recent decades, the improvement of diagnostic levels has led to a refinement classification of DLBCL and the development of new therapeutic approaches. The objective of this review was to summarize the latest studies examining genetic lesions and therapies for DLBCL.

Economic Evaluations of Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapies for Hematologic and Solid Malignancies: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review evidence on the cost-effectiveness of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies for patients with cancer.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched in October 2022 and updated in September 2023. Systematic reviews, health technology assessments, and economic evaluations that compared costs and effects of CAR-T therapy in patients with cancer were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, synthesized results, and critically appraised studies using the Philips checklist. Cost data were presented in 2022 US dollars.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 1809 records, 47 of which were included. Most of included studies were cost-utility analysis, published between 2018 and 2023, and conducted in the United States. Tisagenlecleucel, axicabtagene ciloleucel, idecabtagene vicleucel, ciltacabtagene autoleucel, lisocabtagene maraleucel, brexucabtagene autoleucel, and relmacabtagene autoleucel were compared with various standard of care chemotherapies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for CAR-T therapies ranged from $9424 to $4 124 105 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in adults and from $20 784 to $243 177 per QALY in pediatric patients. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were found to improve over longer time horizons or when an earlier cure point was assumed. Most studies failed to meet the Philips checklist due to a lack of head-to-head comparisons and uncertainty surrounding CAR-T costs and curative effects.

CONCLUSIONS

CAR-T therapies were more expensive and generated more QALYs than comparators, but their cost-effectiveness was uncertain and dependent on patient population, cancer type, and model assumptions. This highlights the need for more nuanced economic evaluations and continued research to better understand the value of CAR-T therapies in diverse patient populations.

The Health Impacts of Better Access to Axicabtagene Ciloleucel: The Case of Spain

In this study, the health impacts of improving access to treatment with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) was assessed in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after ≥2 lines of therapy in Spain. A partitioned survival mixture cure model was used to estimate the lifetime accumulated life years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient treated with axi-cel versus chemotherapy. Efficacy data were extracted from the ZUMA-1 trial for axi-cel and from the SCHOLAR-1 study for chemotherapy. In the base case, the incremental outcomes of axi-cel versus chemotherapy were evaluated in a cohort of 187 patients treated with CAR T-cell therapies, as reported by the "Spanish National Health System Plan for Advanced Therapies", and in the alternative scenario in the full eligible population based on epidemiological estimates (n = 490). Taking those currently treated with axi-cel, compared with chemotherapy, axi-cel provided an additional 1341 LYGs and 1053 QALYs. However, when all eligible patients (n = 490) were treated, axi-cel provided an additional 3515 LYs and 2759 QALYs. Therefore, if all eligible patients were treated with axi-cel rather than those currently treated as per the registry (n = 187), there would have been an additional 303 patients treated, resulting in an additional 2173 LYGs and 1706 QALYs in total. The lack of access in Spain has led to a loss of a substantial number of LYGs and QALYs, and efforts should be made to improve access for all eligible patients.

Economic evaluation of anti-CD19 CAR T-cell pathway for large B-cell lymphomas in the real-life setting: the experience of an Italian hub center in the first three years of activity

Poor literature report actual and detailed costs of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell pathway in a real-life setting. We retrospectively collect data for all patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive large B-cell lymphoma who underwent leukapheresis between August 2019 and August 2022. All costs and medical resource consumption accountability were calculated on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis, starting from leukapheresis to the time when the patient (infused or not) exited the CAR T-cell pathway for any reason. Eighty patients were addressed to leukapheresis and 59 were finally infused. After excluding CAR-T product cost, the main driver of higher costs were hospitalizations followed by the examinations/procedures and other drugs, respectively 43.9%, 26.3% and 25.4% of the total. Regarding costs of drugs and medications other than CAR T products, the most expensive items are those referred to AEs, both infective and extra-infective within 30 days from infusion, that account for 63% of the total. Density plot of cost analyses did not show any statistically significant difference with respect to the years of leukapheresis or infusion. To achieve finally 59/80 infused patients the per capita patients without CAR-T products results 74,000 euros. This analysis covers a growing concern on health systems, the burden of expenses related to CAR T-cell therapy, which appears to provide significant clinical benefit despite its high cost, thus making economic evaluations highly relevant. The relevance of this study should be also viewed in light of continuously evolving indications for this therapy.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for aggressive B-cell lymphomas

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a revolutionary approach in the treatment of lymphoma. This review article provides an overview of the four FDA-approved CAR T-cell products for aggressive B-cell lymphoma, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma, highlighting their efficacy and toxicity as well as discussing future directions.

A Review of the Cost-Effectiveness Evidence for FDA-Approved Cell and Gene Therapies

Cell and gene therapy (CGT) innovations have provided several significant breakthroughs in recent years. However, CGTs often come with a high upfront cost, raising questions about patient access, affordability, and long-term value. This study reviewed cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) studies that have attempted to assess the long-term value of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved CGTs. Two reviewers independently searched the Tufts Medical Center CEA Registry to identify all studies for FDA-approved CGTs, per January 2023. A data extraction template was used to summarize the evidence in terms of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and essential modeling assumptions, combined with a template to extract the adherence to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. The review identified 26 CEA studies for seven CGTs. Around half of the base-case cost-effectiveness results indicated that the cost per QALY was below $100,000-$150,000, often used as a threshold for reasonable cost-effectiveness in the United States. However, the results varied substantially across studies for the same treatment, ranging from being considered very cost-effective to far from cost-effective. Most models were based on data from single-arm trials with relatively short follow-ups, and different long-term extrapolations between studies caused large differences in the modeled cost-effectiveness results. In sum, this review showed that, despite the high upfront costs, many CGTs have cost-effectiveness evidence that can support long-term value. Nonetheless, substantial uncertainty regarding long-term value exists because so much of the modeling results are driven by uncertain extrapolations beyond the clinical trial data.

A systematic review on the appropriate discounting rates for the economic evaluation of gene therapies: whether a specific approach is justified to tackle the challenges?

OBJECTIVES

Discounting the cost and effect for health intervention is a controversial topic over the last two decades. In particular, the cost-effectiveness of gene therapies is especially sensitive to the discount rate because of the substantial delay between the upfront cost incurred and long-lasing clinical benefits received. This study aims to investigate the influence of employing alternative discount rates on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of gene therapies.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to include health economic evaluations of gene therapies that were published until April 2023.

RESULTS

Sensitivity or scenario analysis indicated that discount rate represented one of the most influential factors for the ICERs of gene therapies. Discount rate for cost and benefit was positively correlated with the cost-effectiveness of gene therapies, that is, a lower discount rate significantly improves the ICERs. The alternative discount rate employed in some cases could be powerful to alter the conclusion on whether gene therapies are cost-effective and acceptable for reimbursement.

CONCLUSIONS

Although discount rate will have substantial influence on the ICERs of gene therapies, there lacks solid evidence to justify a different discounting rule for gene therapies. However, it is proposed that the discount rate in the reference case should be updated to reflect the real-time preference, which in turn will affect the ICERs and reimbursement of gene therapies more profoundly than conventional therapies.

Development and Validation of a Prediction Model of Outcome After B-Cell Maturation Antigen-Directed Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

PURPOSE

Although chimeric antigen receptor T therapy (CAR-T) cells are an established therapy for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), there are no established models predicting outcome to identify patients who may benefit the most from CAR-T.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is an international retrospective observational study including patients with RRMM infused with currently available commercial or academically produced anti-B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) CAR-T. We describe characteristics and outcomes in Europe (n = 136) and the United States (n = 133). Independent predictors of relapse/progression built a simple prediction model (Myeloma CAR-T Relapse [MyCARe] model) in the training cohort (Europe), which was externally validated (US cohort) and tested within patient- and treatment-specific subgroups.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 87% and comparable between both cohorts, and complete responses were seen in 48% (Europe) and 49% (the United States). The median time to relapse was 5 months, and early relapse <5 months from infusion showed poor survival across cohorts, with the 12-month overall survival of 30% (Europe) and 14% (the United States). The presence of extramedullary disease or plasma cell leukemia, lenalidomide-refractoriness, high-risk cytogenetics, and increased ferritin at the time of lymphodepletion were independent predictors of early relapse or progression. Each factor received one point, forming the three-tiered MyCARe model: scores 0-1 (low risk), scores 2-3 (intermediate risk), and a score of 4 (high risk). The MyCARe model was significantly associated with distinct 5-month incidence of relapse/progression (P < .001): 7% for low-risk, 27% for intermediate-risk, and 53% for high-risk groups. The model was validated in the US cohort and maintained prognostic utility for response, survival, and outcomes across subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes of patients with RRMM after CAR-T are comparable between Europe and the United States. The MyCARe model may facilitate optimal timing of CAR-T cells in patient-specific subgroups.

Current development of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and high-grade B-cell lymphoma

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has become a commercially available treatment option for relapsed or refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with two or more lines of prior therapies, and recently for high-risk r/r DLBCL with one prior line of therapy. The successful development of CAR T-cell therapy for multiple relapsed DLBCL has led to a boom in subsequent trials that investigated its utility in patients with other r/r B-cell lymphoma subtypes. However, CAR T-cell therapy is a multistep process that includes leukapheresis and manipulation which take several weeks. Therefore, patients with rapidly progressing or bulky disease may not be able to complete the therapeutic regimen involving CAR T-cell products. This raises the question of the generalizability of the results of pivotal studies to the entire population. In this review, we summarize the development of CAR-T cell therapy for B-cell lymphoma and discuss strategies to further improve the clinical outcomes of this treatment.

Cost-effectiveness analysis 3L of axicabtagene ciloleucel vs tisagenlecleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel in Japan

Aim: Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed to compare axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) with tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) and lisocabtagene (liso-cel) for treatment of relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma in adult patients after ≥2 lines of therapy in Japan. Materials & methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using the partition survival mixture cure model based on the ZUMA-1 trial and adjusted to the JULIET and TRANSCEND trials using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons. Results & conclusion: Axi-cel was associated with greater incremental life years (3.13 and 2.85) and incremental quality-adjusted life-years (2.65 and 2.24), thus generated lower incremental direct medical costs (-$976.29 [-¥137,657] and -$242.00 [-¥34,122]), compared with tisa-cel and liso-cel. Axi-cel was cost-effective option compared with tisa-cel and liso-cel from a Japanese payer's perspective.

CAR T-cell Therapy for Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma in Canada: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a novel cell therapy for treating non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The development of CAR T-cell therapy has transformed oncology treatment by offering a potential cure. However, due to the high cost of these therapies, and the large number of eligible patients, decision makers are faced with difficult funding decisions. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel for adults with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in Canada using updated survival data from the recent JULIET trial.

METHODS

We developed an individual-simulated discrete event simulation model to assess the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) of tisagenlecleucel compared with salvage chemotherapy. Survival estimates were obtained from a published clinical trial and retrospective analysis. If patients remained progression free for 5 y, they were assumed to be in long-term remission. Costing and utility data were obtained from reports and published sources. A Canadian health care payer perspective was used, and outcomes were modeled over a lifetime horizon. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 1.5% annually, with costs reported in 2021 Canadian dollars. A probabilistic analysis was used, and model parameters were varied in 1-way sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses.

RESULTS

After we incorporated the latest clinical evidence, tisagenlecleucel led to an additional cost of $503,417 and additional effectiveness of 2.48 QALYs, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $202,991 compared with salvage chemotherapy. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY, tisagenlecleucel had a 0% likelihood of being cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

At the current drug price, tisagenlecleucel was not found to be a cost-effective option. These results heavily depend on assumptions regarding long-term survival and the price of CAR T. Real-world evidence is needed to reduce uncertainty.

HIGHLIGHTS

For patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who failed 2 or more lines of systemic therapy, CAR T was not found to be a cost-effective treatment option at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000.These results heavily depend on the expected long-term survival. The uncertainty in the model may be improved using real-world evidence reported in the future.

Prediction of 5-year overall survival of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma on the pola-R-CHP regimen based on 2-year event-free survival and progression-free survival

This study aimed to predict the 5-year overall survival (OS) benefit of pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP in the POLARIX trial based on the 2-year event-free survival (EFS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We identified randomized controlled trials (RCT) published before 31 May 2023. The correlation between the logarithmic (log) hazard ratio (HR) for EFS (HREFS) or PFS (HRPFS) and the HR for OS (HROS) was estimated at the trial-level. Correlation analysis was performed between 2-year PFS or EFS and 5-year OS rates at the treatment arm-level. Linear regression models were used to calculate the 5-year OS of pola-R-CHP and R-CHOP. In the included 20 RCTs, a linear correlation between HREFS (r = 0.765) or HRPFS (r = 0.534) and HROS was observed at the trial- level. Two-year EFS (r = 0.918) or 2-year PFS (r = 0.865) correlated linearly with 5-year OS. Linear regression analysis between 2-year EFS/PFS and 5-year OS gave estimated 5-year OS rates between pola-R-CHP and R-CHOP of 6.4% and 6.3%, respectively. Two-year EFS and PFS are feasible early endpoints in patients with DLBCL treated primarily with immunochemotherapy. The pola-R-CHP regimen is expected to improve 5-year OS.

Cost-Effectiveness of Anti-BCMA Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Despite its promising outcomes, anti-BCMA chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CAR-T) is the most expensive myeloma treatment developed to date, and its cost-effectiveness is an important issue. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of anti-BCMA CAR-T compared to standard antimyeloma therapy in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. The model included myeloma patients in Japan and the United States who have received ≥3 prior lines of antimyeloma therapy, including immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies. A Markov model was constructed to compare the CAR-T strategy, in which patients receive either idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) or ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) followed by 3 lines of multiagent chemotherapy after relapse, and the no CAR-T strategy, in which patients receive only chemotherapy. Data from the LocoMMotion, KarMMa, and CARTITUDE-1 trials were extracted. Several assumptions were made regarding long-term progression-free survival (PFS) with CAR-T. Extensive scenario analyses were made regarding regimens for no CAR-T strategies. The outcome was an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with willingness-to-pay thresholds of ¥7,500,000 in Japan and $150,000 in the United States. When a 5-year PFS of 40% with cilta-cel was assumed, the ICER of the CAR-T strategy versus the no CAR-T strategy was ¥7,603,823 per QALY in Japan and $112,191 per QALY in the United States over a 10-year time horizon. When a 5-year PFS of 15% with ide-cel was assumed, the ICER was ¥20,388,711 per QALY in Japan and $261,678 per QALY in the United States over a 10-year time horizon. The results were highly dependent on the PFS assumption with CAR-T and were robust to changes in most other parameters and scenarios. Although anti-BCMA CAR-T can be cost-effective even under current pricing, a high long-term PFS is necessary.

Selection of bispecific antibody therapies or CAR-T cell therapy in relapsed lymphomas

Patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas have historically poor survival outcomes, with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy now presenting a curative option for a subset of those patients. However, with the approval of several novel bispecific monoclonal antibody (BsAb) therapies with considerable activity in R/R aggressive large B-cell lymphomas (LBCL), patients and oncologists will be faced with decisions regarding how to sequence CAR-T and BsAb therapies based on patient- and disease-related factors. In this review, we compare CAR-T and BsAb therapies for R/R LBCL, highlighting data on the efficacy and toxicity of each treatment paradigm, and provide a roadmap for sequencing these highly effective therapies.

Second-Line Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

First-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) achieves durable remission in approximately 60% of patients. In relapsed or refractory disease, only about 20% achieve durable remission with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The ZUMA-7 (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel]) and TRANSFORM (lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel]) trials demonstrated superior event-free survival (and, in ZUMA-7, overall survival) in primary-refractory or early-relapsed (high-risk) DLBCL with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) compared with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT; however, list prices for CAR-T exceed $400 000 per infusion.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of second-line CAR-T versus salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT.

DESIGN

State-transition microsimulation model.

DATA SOURCES

ZUMA-7, TRANSFORM, other trials, and observational data.

TARGET POPULATION

"High-risk" patients with DLBCL.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Health care sector.

INTERVENTION

Axi-cel or liso-cel versus ASCT.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) in 2022 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $200 000 per QALY.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

The increase in median overall survival was 4 months for axi-cel and 1 month for liso-cel. For axi-cel, the ICER was $684 225 per QALY and the iNMB was -$107 642. For liso-cel, the ICER was $1 171 909 per QALY and the iNMB was -$102 477.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

To be cost-effective with a WTP of $200 000, the cost of CAR-T would have to be reduced to $321 123 for axi-cel and $313 730 for liso-cel. Implementation in high-risk patients would increase U.S. health care spending by approximately $6.8 billion over a 5-year period.

LIMITATION

Differences in preinfusion bridging therapies precluded cross-trial comparisons.

CONCLUSION

Neither second-line axi-cel nor liso-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $200 000 per QALY. Clinical outcomes improved incrementally, but costs of CAR-T must be lowered substantially to enable cost-effectiveness.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

No research-specific funding.

Estimating the Cost per Clinical Outcome of Second-Line Liso-Cel Versus Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Transplantation-Intended Relapsed/Refractory Large B Cell Lymphoma

It is important to consider the total cost of care (TCOC) associated with a therapy and clinical benefit for relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B cell lymphoma (LBCL). We estimated the 1-year TCOC and cost per clinical outcome for patients with R/R LBCL treated with second-line lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) using data from the TRANSFORM study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03575351). A cost per clinical outcome analysis using a Monte Carlo simulation approach was conducted. Cost inputs were generated from a retrospective microcosting analysis of healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). Patient-level data from an interim analysis (March 2021) were used to derive HCRU and clinical inputs. Clinical inputs included median event-free survival (EFS), median progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and complete response (CR) rate. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean (standard deviation) TCOC per patient was $550,864 ($173,087) for liso-cel and $413,200 ($290,802) for ASCT. The cost per clinical outcome model estimated a mean cost for liso-cel versus ASCT per EFS month of $57,295 versus $186,369, per PFS month of $40,949 versus $78,797, per overall responder of $653,965 versus $881,804, and per complete responder of $828,045 versus $1,063,822. This economic model shows reductions in mean estimated TCOC per EFS month, PFS month, overall responder, and complete responder with liso-cel versus ASCT owing to the superior efficacy of liso-cel. Although liso-cel-treated patients incurred greater upfront costs, fewer required subsequent therapy, and they accumulated less downstream costs. These results underscore the importance of considering the durability of response and clinical benefit when assessing total costs.

Pricing Treatments Cost-Effectively when They Have Multiple Indications: Not Just a Simple Threshold Analysis

BACKGROUND

Economic evaluations of treatments increasingly employ price-threshold analyses. When a treatment has multiple indications, standard price-threshold analyses can be overly simplistic. We examine how rules governing indication-specific prices and reimbursement decisions affect value-based price analyses.

METHODS

We analyze a 2-stage game between 2 players: the therapy's manufacturer and the payer purchasing it for patients. First, the manufacturer selects a price(s) that may be indication specific. Then, the payer decides whether to provide reimbursement at the offered price(s). We assume known indication-specific demand. The manufacturer seeks to maximize profit. The payer seeks to maximize total population incremental net monetary benefit and will not pay more than their willingness-to-pay threshold. We consider game variants defined by constraints on the manufacturer's ability to price and payer's ability to provide reimbursement differentially by indication.

RESULTS

When both the manufacturer and payer can make indication-specific decisions, the problem simplifies to multiple single-indication price-threshold analyses, and the manufacturer captures all the consumer surplus. When the manufacturer is restricted to one price and the payer must make an all-or-nothing reimbursement decision, the selected price is a weighted average of indication-specific threshold prices such that reimbursement of more valuable indications subsidizes reimbursement of less valuable indications. With a single price and indication-specific coverage decisions, the manufacturer may select a high price where fewer patients receive treatment because the payer restricts reimbursement to the set of indications providing value commensurate with the high price. However, the manufacturer may select a low price, resulting in reimbursement for more indications and positive consumer surplus.

CONCLUSIONS

When treatments have multiple indications, economic evaluations including price-threshold analyses should carefully consider jurisdiction-specific rules regarding pricing and reimbursement decisions.

HIGHLIGHTS

With treatment prices rising, economic evaluations increasingly employ price-threshold analyses to identify value-based prices. Standard price-threshold analyses can be overly simplistic when treatments have multiple indications.Jurisdiction-specific rules governing indication-specific prices and reimbursement decisions affect value-based price analyses.When the manufacturer is restricted to one price for all indications and the payer must make an all-or-nothing reimbursement decision, the selected price is a weighted average of indication-specific threshold prices such that reimbursement of the more valuable indications subsidize reimbursement of the less valuable indications.With a single price and indication-specific coverage decisions, the manufacturer may select a high price with fewer patients treated than in the first-best solution. There are also cases in which the manufacturer selects a lower price, resulting in reimbursement for more indications and positive consumer surplus.

Real-world experience of CAR T-cell therapy in older patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

The emergence of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has changed the treatment landscape for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); however, real-world experience reporting outcomes among older patients treated with CAR T-cell therapy is limited. We leveraged the 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims database and analyzed outcomes and cost associated with CAR T-cell therapy in 551 older patients (aged ≥65 years) with DLBCL who received CAR T-cell therapy between 2018 and 2020. CAR T-cell therapy was used in third line and beyond in 19% of patients aged 65 to 69 years and 22% among those aged 70 to 74 years, compared with 13% of patients aged ≥75 years. Most patients received CAR T-cell therapy in an inpatient setting (83%), with an average length of stay of 21 days. The median event-free survival (EFS) following CAR T-cell therapy was 7.2 months. Patients aged ≥75 years had significantly shorter EFS compared with patients aged 65 to 69 and 70 to 74 years, with 12-month EFS estimates of 34%, 43%, and 52%, respectively (P = .002). The median overall survival was 17.1 months, and there was no significant difference by age groups. The median total health care cost during the 90-day follow-up was $352 572 and was similar across all age groups. CAR T-cell therapy was associated with favorable effectiveness, but the CAR T-cell therapy use in older patients was low, especially in patients aged ≥75 years, and this age group had a lower rate of EFS, which illustrates the unmet need for more accessible, effective, and tolerable therapy in older patients, especially those aged ≥75 years.

Value for Money of CAR-T Cell Therapy for Patients with Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma in China: Evidence from a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This research assesses the cost effectiveness of Axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-cel), Tisagenlecleucel (Tis-cel), Relmacabtagene autoleucel (Rel-cel) and Lisocabtagene maraleucel (Lis-cel) against standard of care (SOC) for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in the first-line setting (1L), second-line setting (2L) and third-line or later setting (3L+).

METHODS

Markov modelling based on a flexible survival model was adopted to evaluate four chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies compared with SOC for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The clinical inputs and utility values of the model were derived from the most recent clinical trials and the health care costs from a Chinese provincial clinical center. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to derive incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from the Chinese health care system perspective.

RESULTS

The ICER of Axi-cel (1L) versus SOC was approximately Chinese Yuan (CNY) 2,125,311 per QALY. The ICER for Axi-cel (2L), Tis-cel (2L) and Liso-cel (2L)) versus SOC in transplant-eligible patients were approximately CNY363,977, CNY32,066,781 and CNY347,746 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), respectively. The ICER for Liso-cel (2L) versus SOC in transplant-ineligible patients was approximately CNY1,233,972 per QALY. The ICERs for Axi-cel (3L+), Tis-cel (3L+), Rel-cel (3L+) and Liso-cel (3L+) versus SOC were approximately CNY346,009, CNY654,344, CNY280,964 and CNY436,858 per QALY, respectively. In the scenario analysis using mixture cure models, the long-term survival benefit for CAR-T and SOC groups was found higher, and only Rel-cel (3L+) was found to be cost effective.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated that CAR-T treatments are not cost effective in any-line settings for DLBCL patients at the WHO-recommended willingness-to-pay threshold (CNY257,241 per QALY) in the base-case analysis. Price reduction of CAR-T therapies is the main approach for lowering ICERs and ensuring that the drug costs are proportional to patient health benefits.

Capturing the Impact of Constraints on the Cost-Effectiveness of Cell and Gene Therapies: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Decision-makers need to resolve constraints on delivering cell and gene therapies to patients as these treatments move into routine care. This study aimed to investigate if, and how, constraints that affect the expected cost and health consequences of cell and gene therapies have been included in published examples of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs).

METHOD

A systematic review identified CEAs of cell and gene therapies. Studies were identified from previous systematic reviews and by searching Medline and Embase until 21 January 2022. Constraints described qualitatively were categorised by theme and summarised by a narrative synthesis. Constraints evaluated in quantitative scenario analyses were appraised by whether they changed the decision to recommend treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty-two CEAs of cell (n = 20) and gene therapies (n = 12) were included. Twenty-one studies described constraints qualitatively (70% cell therapy CEAs; 58% gene therapy CEAs). Qualitative constraints were categorised by four themes: single payment models; long-term affordability; delivery by providers; manufacturing capability. Thirteen studies assessed constraints quantitatively (60% cell therapy CEAs; 8% gene therapy CEAs). Two types of constraint were assessed quantitatively across four jurisdictions (USA, Canada, Singapore, The Netherlands): alternatives to single payment models (n = 9 scenario analyses); improving manufacturing (n = 12 scenario analyses). The impact on decision-making was determined by whether the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios crossed a relevant cost-effectiveness threshold for each jurisdiction (outcome-based payment models: n = 25 threshold comparisons made, 28% decisions changed; improving manufacturing: n = 24 threshold comparisons made, 4% decisions changed).

CONCLUSION

The net health impact of constraints is vital evidence to help decision-makers scale up the delivery of cell and gene therapies as patient volume increases and more advanced therapy medicinal products are launched. CEAs will be essential to quantify how constraints affect the cost-effectiveness of care, prioritise constraints to be resolved, and establish the value of strategies to implement cell and gene therapies by accounting for their health opportunity cost.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of axicabtagene ciloleucel as a second-line treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in China and the United States

Background

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-cel) is the first Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Immunotherapy (CAR-T) product approved in China for treating adult patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma after receiving second-line or above systemic therapy. However, it cannot be widely used in clinical practice due to its high price.

Objectives

To evaluate the economic value of Axi-cel fully in countries at different stages of economic development, this article, from the perspective of the medical and health system in China and the United States, evaluated the cost-effectiveness of Axi-cel in the second-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

Design

Cost effectiveness analysis of Axi-cel in the treatment of relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL).

Methods

Based on the clinical trial data of ZUMA-7, a short-term decision tree and a long-term semi-Markov partitioned survival model were constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the two strategies. This model was cycled for 40 years in 1-month cycles. In this article, only direct medical costs were considered. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to assess the robustness of the base-case results.

Results

In the baseline cost-effectiveness analysis, Axi-cel was associated with more quality-adjusted life year (QALY; 2.72 versus 1.46) and greater costs overall ($180,501.55 versus $123,221.34) than standard second-line chemotherapy in China. Moreover, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the Axi-cel group was $45,726.66/QALY, which was greater than the threshold of $37,654.5. To achieve cost-effectiveness, the price of Axi-cel must be reduced appropriately. In the United States, Axi-cel was associated with more QALYs (2.63 versus 1.74) and greater costs overall ($415,915.16 versus $289,564.34). The ICER for the Axi-cel was $142,326.94/QALY, below the set threshold of $150,000.

Conclusion

Axi-cel is not a cost-effective option as second-line therapy for treating DLBCL in China. However, In the United States, Axi-cel has shown a cost-effectiveness advantage as a second-line treatment for DLBCL.

Cost effectiveness analysis of CAR-T cell therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in China

BACKGROUND

The landscape of treatment strategies for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has dramatically changed due to the emergence of chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two CAR-T cell treatments for RRMM patients from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

METHODS

Markov model was used to compare currently available salvage chemotherapy with Idecabtagene vicleucel (Ide-cel) and Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (Cilta-cel) for treatment of patients with RRMM. The model was developed based on data from three studies: CARTITUDE-1, KarMMa and MAMMOTH. The healthcare cost and utility of RRMM patients were collected from a provincial clinical center in China.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, 3.4% and 30.6% of RRMM patients were expected to be long-term survivors after 5 years of Ide-cel and Cilta-cel treatment, respectively. Compared to salvage chemotherapy, Ide-cel and Cilta-cel were associated with incremental QALYs of 1.19 and 3.31, and incremental costs of US $140,693 and $119,806, leading to ICERs of $118,229 and $36,195 per QALY, respectively. At an ICER threshold of $37,653/QALY gained, the probability that Ide-cel and Cilta-cel are cost-effective were estimated to be 0% and 72%, respectively. With younger target people entering the model, and partitioned survival model in scenario analysis, the ICERs of Cilta-cel and Ide-cel changed rather mildly and their cost-effectiveness results were same to base analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Base on the willingness-to-pay of 3 times China's per capita GDP in 2021, Cilta-cel was considered to be a more cost-effective option compared to salvage chemotherapy for RRMM in China, while Ide-cel was not.

Cost-Effectiveness of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel Versus Axicabtagene Ciloleucel and Tisagenlecleucel in the Third-Line or Later Treatment Setting for Relapsed or Refractory Large B-cell Lymphoma in the United States

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus other available chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies, including axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), in patients who had received at least two prior therapies from a United States (US) commercial third-party payer perspective.

METHODS

To capture this heterogeneity in survival outcomes, we used mixture cure models to extrapolate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patient-level data from TRANSCEND NHL 001 for liso-cel and reconstructed patient-level data from ZUMA-1 for axi-cel, JULIET for tisa-cel, and SCHOLAR-1 for salvage chemotherapy, derived using the Guyot method, were used for OS and PFS. The model included adverse events associated with liso-cel, axi-cel, and tisa-cel.

RESULTS

Liso-cel was less costly (incremental cost of - $74,980) and marginally more effective (0.002 incremental quality-adjusted life-years [QALY]) than axi-cel and had an incremental cost of $67,925 and 2.02 incremental QALYs over tisa-cel in the base case. Results remained consistent in sensitivity analyses, with the liso-cel OS cure fraction being the main driver of cost-effectiveness compared with both axi-cel and tisa-cel.

CONCLUSION

This analysis estimated that liso-cel is cost-effective compared with tisa-cel and axi-cel from a commercial US payer perspective.

Long-term outcomes following CAR T cell therapy: what we know so far

Chimeric antigen receptors (CAR) are engineered fusion proteins designed to target T cells to antigens expressed on cancer cells. CAR T cells are now an established treatment for patients with relapsed and/or refractory B cell lymphomas, B cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and multiple myeloma. At the time of this writing, over a decade of follow-up data are available from the initial patients who received CD19-targeted CAR T cells for B cell malignancies. Data on the outcomes of patients who received B cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted CAR T cells for multiple myeloma are more limited owing to the more recent development of these constructs. In this Review, we summarize long-term follow-up data on efficacy and toxicities from patients treated with CAR T cells targeting CD19 or BCMA. Overall, the data demonstrate that CD19-targeted CAR T cells can induce prolonged remissions in patients with B cell malignancies, often with minimal long-term toxicities, and are probably curative for a subset of patients. By contrast, remissions induced by BCMA-targeted CAR T cells are typically more short-lived but also generally have only limited long-term toxicities. We discuss factors associated with long-term remissions, including the depth of initial response, malignancy characteristics predictive of response, peak circulating CAR levels and the role of lymphodepleting chemotherapy. We also discuss ongoing investigational strategies designed to improve the length of remission following CAR T cell therapy.

Overcoming Barriers to Referral for Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

BACKGROUND

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most prevalent subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Although outcomes to frontline therapy are encouraging, patients who are refractory to or relapse after first-line therapy experience inferior outcomes. A significant proportion of patients treated with additional lines of cytotoxic chemotherapy ultimately succumb to their disease as established in the SCHOLAR-1 study.

CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR (CAR)-T CELL THERAPY

CAR-T cell therapy is a novel approach to cancer management that reprograms a patient's own T cells to better target and eliminate cancer cells. It was initially approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) DLBCL in the third line of treatment. Based on recently published randomized data, CAR-T cell therapy (axicabtagene ciloleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel) has also been approved in the second line of treatment for patients who are primary refractory or relapse within 12 months of initiation of first-line therapy. Despite the proven efficacy in treating r/r DLBCL with cluster of differentiation (CD)19-directed CAR-T cell therapy, several barriers exist that may prevent eligible patients from receiving treatment.

KEY BARRIERS TO CAR-T CELL TREATMENT

Barriers to treatment include cost of therapy, patient hesitancy, required travel to academic treatment centers, nonreferrals, lack of understanding of CAR-T cell therapy, lack of caregiver support, knowledge of resources available, and timely patient selection by referring oncologists.

CONCLUSION

In this review, an overview of the FDA-approved CD19-directed CAR-T cell therapies (tisagenlecleucel, axicabtagene ciloleucel, and lisocabtagene maraleucel) is provided from pivotal clinical trials and supporting real-world evidence from retrospective studies. In both clinical trials and real-world settings CAR-T cell therapy has been shown to be safe and efficacious for treating patients with r/r DLBCL. However, several barriers prevent eligible patients from accessing these therapies. Barriers to referrals for CAR-T cell therapy are presented with recommendations to improve collaboration between community oncologists and physicians from CAR-T cell therapy treatment centers and subsequent long-term care of patients in community treatment centers.

Engineering T Cell Development for the Next Generation of Stem Cell-Derived Immunotherapies

Engineered T cells are at the leading edge of clinical cell therapy. T cell therapies have had a remarkable impact on patient care for a subset of hematological malignancies. This foundation has motivated the development of off-the-shelf engineered cell therapies for a broad range of devastating indications. Achieving this vision will require cost-effective manufacturing of precision cell products capable of addressing multiple process and clinical-design challenges. Pluripotent stem cell (PSC)-derived engineered T cells are emerging as a solution of choice. To unleash the full potential of PSC-derived T cell therapies, the field will require technologies capable of robustly orchestrating the complex series of time- and dose-dependent signaling events needed to recreate functional T cell development in the laboratory. In this article, we review the current state of allogenic T cell therapies, focusing on strategies to generate engineered lymphoid cells from PSCs. We highlight exciting recent progress in this field and outline timely opportunities for advancement with an emphasis on niche engineering and synthetic biology.

Dynamic Mortality Modeling: Incorporating Predictions of Future General Population Mortality into Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Health economic models commonly apply observed general population mortality rates to simulate future deaths in a cohort. This is potentially problematic, because mortality statistics are records of the past, not predictions for the future. We propose a new dynamic general population mortality modeling approach, which enables analysts to implement predictions of future changes in mortality rates. The potential implications of moving from a conventional static approach to a dynamic approach are illustrated using a case study.

METHODS

The model utilized in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence appraisal TA559, axicabtagene ciloleucel axi for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, was replicated. National mortality projections were taken from the UK Office for National Statistics. Mortality rates by age and sex were updated each modeled year with the first modeled year using 2022 rates, the second modeled year 2023 and so on. A total of 4 different assumptions were made around age distribution: fixed mean age, lognormal, normal, and gamma. The dynamic model outcomes were compared with those from a conventional static approach.

RESULTS

Including dynamic calculations increased the undiscounted life-years attributed to general population mortality by 2.4 to 3.3 years. This led to an increase in discounted incremental life-years within the case study of 0.38 to 0.45 years (8.1%-8.9%), and a commensurate impact on the economically justifiable price of £14 456 to £17 097.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of a dynamic approach is technically simple and has the potential to meaningfully affect estimates of cost-effectiveness analysis. Therefore, we call on health economists and health technology assessment bodies to move toward use of dynamic mortality modeling in future.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Frontline Polatuzumab-Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, and Prednisone and/or Second-Line Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy Versus Standard of Care for Treatment of Patients With Intermediate- to High-Risk Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

PURPOSE

Recent studies of polatuzumab vedotin and CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) have shown significant improvements in progression-free survival over standard of care (SOC) for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. However, they are costly, and it is unclear whether these strategies, alone or combined, are cost-effective over SOC.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to compare four strategies for patients with newly diagnosed intermediate- to high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: strategy 1: polatuzumab-rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (R-CHP) plus second-line CAR-T for early relapse (< 12 months); strategy 2: polatuzumab-R-CHP plus second-line salvage therapy ± autologous stem-cell transplant; strategy 3: rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone plus second-line CAR-T for early relapse; strategy 4: SOC (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone plus second-line salvage therapy ± autologous stem-cell transplant). Transition probabilities were estimated from trial data. Lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated from US and Canadian payer perspectives. Willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of $150,000 US dollars (USD) or Canadian dollars (CAD)/QALY were used.

RESULTS

In probabilistic analyses (10,000 simulations), each strategy was incrementally more effective than the previous strategy, but also more costly. Adding polatuzumab-R-CHP to the SOC had an ICER of $546,956 (338,797-1,199,923) USD/QALY and $245,381 (151,671-573,250) CAD/QALY. Adding second-line CAR-T to the SOC had an ICER of $309,813 (190,197-694,200) USD/QALY and $303,163 (221,300-1,063,864) CAD/QALY. Simultaneously adding both polatuzumab-R-CHP and second-line CAR-T to the SOC had an ICER of $488,284 (326,765-840,157) USD/QALY and $267,050 (182,832-520,922) CAD/QALY.

CONCLUSION

Given uncertain incremental benefits in long-term survival and high costs, neither polatuzumab-R-CHP frontline, CAR-T second-line, nor a combination are likely to be cost-effective in the United States or Canada at current pricing compared with the SOC.

Multidimensional Results and Reflections on CAR-T: The Italian Evidence

The present study aims at defining the economic and organizational impacts of the introduction of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) in Italy, for the management of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients in third-line therapy, defining the overall level of sustainability for both hospitals and the National Healthcare System (NHS). The analysis focused on CAR-T and Best Salvage Care (in the following BSC), assuming the Italian hospital and NHS perspectives, over a 36-month time horizon. Process mapping and activity-based costing methodologies were applied to collect the hospital costs related to the BSC and CAR-T pathways, including adverse event management. Anonymous administrative data on services provided (diagnostic and laboratory examinations, hospitalizations, outpatient procedures, and therapies) to 47 third-line patients with lymphoma, as well as any organizational investments required, were collected, in two different Italian Hospitals. The economic results showed that the BSC clinical pathway required less resources in comparison with CAR-T (excluding the cost related to the therapy) (BSC: 29,558.41 vs. CAR-T: EUR 71,220.84, -58.5%). The budget impact analysis depicts that the introduction of CAR-T would generate an increase in costs ranging from 15% to 23%, without considering treatment costs. The assessment of the organizational impact reveals that the introduction of CAR-T therapy would require additional investments equal to a minimum of EUR 15,500 to a maximum of EUR 100,897.49, from the hospital perspective. Results show new economic evidence for healthcare decision makers, to optimize the appropriateness of resource allocation. The present analysis suggests the need to introduce a specific reimbursement tariff, both at the hospital and at NHS levels, since no consensus exists, at least in the Italian setting, concerning the proper remuneration for the hospitals who guarantee this innovative pathway, assuming high risks related to timely management of adverse events.

The role of macrophages-mediated communications among cell compositions of tumor microenvironment in cancer progression

Recent studies have revealed that tumor-associated macrophages are the most abundant stromal cells in the tumor microenvironment and play an important role in tumor initiation and progression. Furthermore, the proportion of macrophages in the tumor microenvironment is associated with the prognosis of patients with cancer. Tumor-associated macrophages can polarize into anti-tumorigenic phenotype (M1) and pro-tumorigenic phenotype (M2) by the stimulation of T-helper 1 and T-helper 2 cells respectively, and then exert opposite effects on tumor progression. Besides, there also is wide communication between tumor-associated macrophages and other immune compositions, such as cytotoxic T cells, regulatory T cells, cancer-associated fibroblasts, neutrophils and so on. Furthermore, the crosstalk between tumor-associated macrophages and other immune cells greatly influences tumor development and treatment outcomes. Notably, many functional molecules and signaling pathways have been found to participate in the interactions between tumor-associated macrophages and other immune cells and can be targeted to regulate tumor progression. Therefore, regulating these interactions and CAR-M therapy are considered to be novel immunotherapeutic pathways for the treatment of malignant tumors. In this review, we summarized the interactions between tumor-associated macrophages and other immune compositions in the tumor microenvironment and the underlying molecular mechanisms and analyzed the possibility to block or eradicate cancer by regulating tumor-associated macrophage-related tumor immune microenvironment.

The role of additional chemotherapy prior to autologous HCT in patients with relapse/refractory DLBCL in partial remission-A retrospective multicenter study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the role of additional chemotherapy before autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in patients with relapse/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who achieve partial remission following first salvage therapy.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of all adult patients with DLBCL who underwent HCT between 2008 and 2020 and achieved partial response (PR) after the first salvage and were either referred directly to HCT (n = 47) or received additional salvage therapy before HCT (n = 22).

RESULTS

Post-HCT CR rate and progression-free survival were comparable between the two groups (66% vs. 68%, p = .86 and median not reached vs. 10.2 months [95% confidence interval, CI 7.1-12.3], p = .27, respectively). Median overall survival (OS) and estimated 3-year OS favored patients who were directly referred to HCT (105.8 [95% CI 63-148] months vs. 14.5 [95% CI 0-44] months, p = .035, and 65% [95% CI 51%-75%] vs. 40% [95% CI 21%-53%], p = .035, respectively). In Cox regression model, while International Prognostic Index and primary refractory versus relapse disease did not impact OS, allocation to a second salvage regimen and older age were both associated with inferior survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.57 95% CI 1.1-5.8, p = .023 and HR = 1.04 95% CI 0.99-1.2, p = .064, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Referring patients with chemotherapy-sensitive disease in PR directly to HCT is associated with better OS compared to those receiving additional lines of treatment.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Tisagenlecleucel Versus Blinatumomab in Children and Young Adults with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Partitioned Survival Model to Assess the Impact of an Outcome-Based Payment Arrangement

OBJECTIVE

This research assesses the impact of an outcome-based payment arrangement (OBA) linking complete remission (CR) to survival as a means of maintaining cost-effectiveness for a chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy in young patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

METHODS

A partitioned survival model (PSM) was used to model the cost-effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel versus blinatumomab in ALL from the Australian healthcare system perspective. A decision tree modeled different OBAs by funneling patients into a series of PSMs based on response. Outcomes were informed by individual patient data, while costs followed Australian treatment practices. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were combined to calculate a single incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), reported in US dollars (2022) at a discount rate of 5% on costs and outcomes.

RESULTS

For the base case, incremental costs and benefit were $379,595 and 4.27 QALYs, giving an ICER of $88,979. The ICER was most sensitive to discount rate ($57,660-$75,081), "cure point" ($62,718-$116,206) and extrapolation method ($76,018-$94,049). OBAs had a modest effect on the ICER when response rates varied. A responder-only payment was the most effective arrangement for maintaining the ICER ($88,249-$89,434), although this option was associated with the greatest financial uncertainty. A split payment arrangement (payment on infusion followed by payment on response) reduced variability in the ICER ($82,650-$99,154) compared with a single, upfront payment ($77,599-$107,273).

CONCLUSION

OBAs had a modest impact on reducing cost-effectiveness uncertainty. The value of OBAs should be weighed against the additional resources needed to administer such arrangements, and importantly overall cost to government.

Efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy and autologous stem cell transplant in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A systematic review

Background

We aimed to compare the efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy with that of autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL).

Research design and methods

We searched eligible publications up to January 31st, 2022, in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Springer, and Scopus. A total of 16 publications with 3484 patients were independently evaluated and analyzed using STATA SE software.

Results

Patients who underwent CAR-T cell therapy showed a better overall response rate (ORR) and partial response (PR) than those treated with auto-HSCT (CAR-T vs. auto-HSCT, ORR: 80% vs. 73%, HR:0.90,95%CI:0.76-1.07,P = 0.001; PR: 20% vs. 14%, HR:0.65,95%CI:0.62-0.68,P = 0.034). No significant difference was observed in 6-month overall survival (OS) (CAR-T vs. auto-HSCT, six-month OS: 81% vs. 84%, HR:1.23,95%CI:0.63-2.38, P = 0.299), while auto-HSCT showed a favorable 1 and 2-year OS (CAR-T vs. auto-HSCT, one-year OS: 64% vs. 73%, HR:2.42,95%CI:2.27-2.79, P < 0.001; two-year OS: 54% vs. 68%, HR:1.81,95%CI:1.78-1.97, P < 0.001). Auto-HSCT also had advantages in progression-free survival (PFS) (CAR-T vs. auto-HSCT, six-month PFS: 53% vs. 76%, HR:2.81,95%CI:2.53-3.11,P < 0.001; one-year PFS: 46% vs. 61%, HR:1.84,95%CI:1.72-1.97,P < 0.001; two-year PFS: 42% vs. 54%, HR:1.62,95%CI:1.53-1.71, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis by age, prior lines of therapy, and ECOG scores was performed to compare the efficacy of both treatment modalities.

Conclusion

Although CAR-T cell therapy showed a beneficial ORR, auto-HSCT exhibited a better long-term treatment superiority in R/R DLBCL patients. Survival outcomes were consistent across different subgroups.

Health utility of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in China

Background

Acute lymphoblastic leukemia is the most common cancer in children. As the 5-year survival rate has been improved to over 80%, more emphasis is now placed on reducing therapy toxicities and enhancing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients during treatment. Our objective was to measure health utility of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (pALL) patients in China, examine utility weights of different treatment phases and influencing factors of health utility, as well as identify which aspects of HRQoL were most impaired.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in Shanghai Children's Medical Center (SCMC) Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine in China from April to November 2021. Primary caregivers of 247 patients completed the assessment by CHU9D-CHN and health utility scores were computed for all the patients and stratified by treatment phases. Various multivariable models were constructed and the best was chosen to identify independent factors associated with utility scores. Factors affecting the most impaired dimensions were also examined.

Results

The overall mean (SD) health utility score was 0.79 (±0.17) and significantly increased from induction (0.73 [±0.19], P < 0.001) to consolidation (0.74 [±0.18]), and to maintenance (0.82 [±0.16]). After adjusting for potentially influencing factors, utility scores in induction (Beta = -0.086, P = 0.005) and consolidation (Beta = -0.074, P = 0.043) were constantly lower than those during maintenance. In item-level analysis, lower age and induction phase were found to be significantly associated with high severity reported on the "school work/homework" dimension. Additionally, only the induction phase (vs. maintenance, OR = 2.24, P = 0.016) was independently associated with the high severity level reported on the "able to join in activities" dimension.

Conclusions

This is the first study that measured health utility of children with pALL in China. Mean health utility scores increased from induction to maintenance. These provided important utility estimates that help inform future health economic models. The phrasing of "School work/homework" in CHU9D-CHN could be further improved. More efforts are needed to design and implement specific interventions targeting at the dimension "able to join in activities" for enhancing HRQoL of children with pALL in China.

Challenges for Economic Evaluations of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are drugs for human use for the treatment of chronic, degenerative, or life-threatening diseases that are based on genes, tissues, or cells. This article aimed to identify and critically review published economic analyses of ATMPs.

METHODS

A systematic review of economic analyses of ATMPs was undertaken. Study characteristics, design, sources of data, resources and unit costs, modeling and extrapolation methods, study results, and sensitivity analyses were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 46 economic analyses of ATMP (from 45 articles) were included; 4 were cell therapy medicinal products, 33 gene therapy medicinal products, and 9 tissue-engineered products. 30 therapies had commercial marketing approval; 39 studies were cost-utility analysis, 5 were cost-effectiveness analysis, and 2 were cost only studies. Four studies predicted that the ATMP offered a step change in the management of the condition and 10 studies estimated that the ATMP would offer a lower mean cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparison with historical controls, pooling of data, and use of techniques such as mixture cure fraction models should be used cautiously. Sensitivity analyses should be used across a plausible range of prices. Clinical studies need to be designed to align with health technology assessment requirements, including generic quality of life, and payers should aim for clarity of criteria. Regulators and national payers should aim for compatibility of registers to allow interchange of data. Given the increasing reliance on industry-funded economic analyses, careful critical review is recommended.

CAR-T Engager proteins optimize anti-CD19 CAR-T cell therapies for lymphoma

B cell lymphoma therapy has been transformed by CD19-targeting cellular therapeutics that induce high clinical response rates and impressive remissions in relapsed and refractory patients. However, approximately half of all patients who respond to CD19-directed cell therapy relapse, the majority within 6 months. One characteristic of relapse is loss or reduction of CD19 expression on malignant B cells. We designed a unique therapeutic to prevent and reverse relapses due to lost or reduced CD19 expression. This novel biologic, a CAR T Engager, binds CD20 and displays the CD19 extracellular domain. This approach increases the apparent CD19 antigen density on CD19-positive/CD20-positive lymphoma cells, and prevents antigen-loss induced relapse, as CD19 bound to CD20 remains present on the cell surface. We demonstrate that this novel therapeutic prevents and reverses lymphoma relapse in vitro and prevents CD19-negative lymphoma growth and relapse in vivo.

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.

Costs, effectiveness, and safety associated with Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy: Results from a comprehensive cancer center

Real world effectiveness, toxicity and costs analyses from chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy are of utmost relevance to determine whether and how to offer patients highly personalized immunotherapy. In this study, we aimed at describing CAR T-cells effectiveness, safety and costs in a Portuguese Comprehensive Cancer Center. We performed a retrospective descriptive study of adult patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma and transformed follicular lymphoma referred to CAR T-cell therapy, between May 2019 and February 2021. Rates of treatment response, toxicity and survival (Kaplan-Meier method) were analyzed by intention-to-treat. Direct medical costs stratified by inpatient-care, outpatient-care, and diagnostic-therapeutic procedures (DTP) were derived based on resources used and their respective unit costs. In twenty patients (median age 49.5y; 55%male; 70%DLBCL; 50% with primary refractory disease), best overall and complete response rates were 65.0% and 45.0%, respectively. Median overall (OS) and progression-free survivals were 9.2 and 7.3 months; 12-month OS rate was 42.6% (95%CI:23.2-78.3). Grade≥3 cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity occurred in 5.6% and 11.1% of patients, respectively. CAR T-cell therapy expenditure, including adverse events costs, was 7 176 196€, or 286 238€ when excluding drug cost. Median cost for treated patient was 355 165€ with CAR T-cell drug cost accounting for 97.0% of the overall expense. Excluding CAR T-cell acquisition cost, inpatient-care and DTP accounted for 57% and 38% of total cost/patient, respectively. Our findings highlight the heavy economic burden of CAR T-cell therapy driven by drug acquisition costs.

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.

Flausino L, Iyer G, Balkrishnan R. Effectiveness of immunological agents in non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) continues to claim millions of lives worldwide. Although its poor prognosis is largely attributed to the lack of adequate and precise detection technologies, cancer cells' suppression of the immune system adds on to the difficulty of identifying abnormal NSCLC tumors in their early stages. Therefore, cancer immunotherapy, which activates the immune system and helps it fight tumors, has recently become the most sought-after technique, especially in the advanced stages of NSCLC, where surgery or chemotherapy may or may not bring about the desired survival benefits in patients.

METHODS

This review focuses on the various immunotherapeutic interventions and their efficacy in advanced NSCLC clinical trials. Monoclonal antibodies like anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies, cancer vaccines, oncolytic viruses and adoptive T cell therapy have been discussed in brief. Furthermore, the effects of gender, age, and race on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors and suggest plausible future approaches in the realm of immuno-oncology.

RESULTS

Immunotherapy is used alone or in combination either with other immunological agents or with chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of these strategies depends extensively on various demographic variables, as some patients respond perfectly well to immunotherapy, while others do not benefit at all or experience disease progression. By targeting a "hallmark" of cancer (immune evasion), immunotherapy has transformed NSCLC management, though several barriers prevent its complete effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

All these immunological strategies should be interpreted in the current setting of synergistic treatment, in which these agents can be combined with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and, or surgery following patient and tumor characteristics to proportionate the best-individualized treatment and achieve superior results. To better pursue this goal, further investigations on cost-effectiveness and sex-gender, race, and age differences in immunotherapy are needed.

Access to and affordability of CAR T-cell therapy in multiple myeloma: an EBMT position paper

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a promising immunotherapeutic approach in the treatment of multiple myeloma, and the recent approval of the first two CAR T-cell products could result in improved outcomes. However, it remains a complex and expensive technology, which poses challenges to health-care systems and society in general, especially in times of crises. This potentially accelerates pre-existing inequalities as access to CAR T-cell therapy varies, both between countries, depending on the level of economic development, and within countries, due to structural disparities in access to quality health care-a parameter strongly correlated with socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and lifestyle. Here, we identify two important issues: affordability and access to CAR T-cell treatment. This consensus statement from clinical investigators, clinicians, nurses, and patients from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) proposes solutions as part of an innovative collaborative strategy to make CAR T-cell therapy accessible to all patients with multiple myeloma.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy is superior to standard of care as second-line therapy for large B-cell lymphoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Treatment with high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is considered standard of care (SOC) second-line treatment for relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). However, outcomes remain suboptimal. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing efficacy and safety of SOC versus chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy as second-line for patients with LBCL refractory or relapsing within 12 months. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Three trials published in 2021 (involving 865 participants) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. EFS as well as OS were significantly improved with CAR-T therapy as compared to SOC, hazard ratio (HR) 0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.68) and HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.60-0.98) respectively. CAR-T therapy was associated with significantly better ORR, relative risk (RR) 1.55 (95% CI 1.12-2.13, p = 0.001). The risk of Grade III/IV adverse event was comparable between the two arms, RR 1.03 (95% CI 0.93-1.14). In summary, CAR-T therapy has superior outcomes as compared to SOC in patients with LBCL refractory or relapsing within 12 months, without excess of toxicity. Longer follow-up is needed to confirm these results and determine the optimal sequencing of CAR-T therapy in the management of LBCL.

Role of CD19 Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cells in Second-Line Large B Cell Lymphoma: Lessons from Phase 3 Trials. An Expert Panel Opinion from the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy

Since 2017, 3 CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies-axicabtagene ciloleucel, tisagenlecleucel, and lisocabtagene maraleucel-have been approved for relapsed/refractory aggressive diffuse large B cell lymphoma after 2 lines of therapy. Recently, 3 prospective phase 3 randomized clinical trials were conducted to define the optimal second-line treatment by comparing each of the CAR T cell products to the current standard of care: ZUMA-7 for axicabtagene ciloleucel, BELINDA for tisagenlecleucel, and TRANSFORM for lisocabtagene maraleucel. These 3 studies, although largely addressing the same question, had different outcomes, with ZUMA-7 and TRANSFORM demonstrating significant improvement with CD19 CAR T cells in second-line therapy compared with standard of care but BELINDA not showing any benefit. The US Food and Drug Administration has now approved axicabtagene ciloleucel and lisocabtagene maraleucel for LBCL that is refractory to first-line chemoimmunotherapy or relapse occurring within 12 months of first-line chemoimmunotherapy. Following the reporting of these practice changing studies, here a group of experts convened by the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy provides a comprehensive review of the 3 studies, emphasizing potential differences, and shares perspectives on what these results mean to clinical practice in this new era of treatment of B cell lymphomas.