KRAS early testing: consensus initiative and cost-effectiveness evaluation for metastatic colorectal patients in an Italian setting

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Monoclonal Antibodies Associated With Chemotherapy in First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (cetuximab and panitumumab) or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (bevacizumab) monoclonal antibodies associated with conventional chemotherapy (CT) (fluorouracil and leucovorin with irinotecan) as a first-line treatment for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A partitioned survival analysis model was adopted to simulate direct health costs and benefits comparing therapeutic options in a 10 years' time horizon. Model data were extracted from the literature and costs were obtained from Brazilian official government databases. The analysis considered the perspective of the Brazilian Public Health System; costs were measured in local currency (BRL) and benefits in quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). A 5% discount rate was applied to costs and benefits. Alternative willingness-to-pay scenarios, varying from 3 to 5 times the cost-effectiveness threshold established in Brazil, were estimated. The results were presented incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The most cost-effective choice would be the association of CT with panitumumab, with an ICER of $58 330.15/QALY compared with isolated CT. The second-best option was CT with bevacizumab and panitumumab, with an ICER of $71 195.40/QALY compared with panitumumab alone. Although having higher costs, the second-best option was the most effective. Both strategies were cost-effective in part of the Monte Carlo iterations, considering the 3× threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

The therapeutic option CT + panitumumab + bevacizumab represents the most significant effectiveness gain in our study. It is the second-lowest cost-effectiveness, and this option includes monoclonal antibodies association for patients with and without KRAS mutation.

Evaluating the quality of the economic evidence in colorectal cancer genomics studies

The increase in the use of genome-based screening and diagnostic tests adds to the overall costs of oncologic care for colorectal cancer. This, in turn, has resulted in an increase in published economic analyses. Aim: To perform a systematic literature review of the available economic evidence evaluating the value of genomic testing for colorectal cancer and appraise the quality of the economic studies conducted to date. Methods: A systematic review of the literature for economic studies of colorectal cancer genomics from January 2006 through October 2020, and evaluation of study quality using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was conducted. The validated QHES was then applied to a final set of articles that met eligibility criteria. Results: Our search of the literature initially yielded 12,859 records. A final set of 49 articles met our inclusion criteria. The QHES score ranged from 24 to 100, with an average score of 82. Most of the studies (n = 40, 82%) scored above 75 and were considered of good quality. Conclusion: Our analysis revealed that most of the economic analyses of colorectal cancer genomic molecular diagnostics in the literature may be of good quality. There is, however, some variation in methodological rigor between the articles.

Molecular predictive testing in precision oncology: The Italian experience

In this review, we describe molecular pathology testing to predict response to targeted treatment of solid tumors, focusing on Italian routine clinical practice. The combination of the universal health care system organized at national, regional, and local levels has led a decentralized model, with a large number of local laboratories performing in-house molecular testing following guidelines issued and external quality assessment organized by the Italian Society of Pathology and Cytopathology-Italian Division of the International Academy of Pathology. In this framework, in the early days of predictive testing, sponsored informatics platforms support to set up national programs that aimed to integrate the activity of oncologists and pathologists to test cancer patients for druggable alterations. More recently, reimbursement for molecular testing is being covered completely by the Italian National Health Service. In the near future, considering the development of complex technologies, we expect that outsourcing samples to next-generation sequencing referral laboratories will take place.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of First-Line FOLFIRI Combined With Cetuximab or Bevacizumab in Patients With RAS Wild-Type Left-Sided Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The FIRE-3 phase III clinical trial demonstrated the marked advantage of prolonging the median overall survival of patients with final RAS wild-type (WT) left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) by 38.3 months after treatment with irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab and by 28.0 months after treatment with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. However, the substantial cost increase and economic impact of using cetuximab imposes a considerable burden on patients and society.

METHODS

A Markov model based on the data collected in the FIRE-3 trial was developed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of treating patients with FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab from the perspective of the Chinese health-care system. Costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated over a lifetime horizon. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed by varying potentially modifiable parameters.

RESULTS

In our analysis, the total treatment costs in the bevacizumab and cetuximab groups were $92 549.31 and $94 987.31, respectively, and the QALYs gained were 1.58 and 2.05. In the base-case analysis, compared with bevacizumab, left-sided RAS WT patients receiving cetuximab gained 0.47 more QALYs at an ICER of $5187.23/QALY ($3166.23/LY). The 1-way sensitivity analysis showed that the most influential parameter was the cost of cetuximab. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that the cost-effective probability of cetuximab group was 92.8% under the willingness-to-pay threshold of $24 081.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with FOLFIRI plus cetuximab in Chinese patients with left-sided RAS WT mCRC may improve health outcomes and use financial resources more efficiently than FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab.

RAS mutation analysis in circulating tumor DNA from patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the AGEO RASANC prospective multicenter study

Background

RAS mutations are currently sought for in tumor samples, which takes a median of almost 3 weeks in western European countries. This creates problems in clinical situations that require urgent treatment and for inclusion in therapeutic trials that need RAS status for randomization. Analysis of circulating tumor DNA might help to shorten the time required to determine RAS mutational status before anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Here we compared plasma with tissue RAS analysis in a large prospective multicenter cohort.

Patients and methods

Plasma samples were collected prospectively from chemotherapy-naive patients and analyzed centrally by next-generation sequencing (NGS) with the colon lung cancer V2 Ampliseq panel and by methylation digital PCR (WIF1 and NPY genes). Tumoral RAS status was determined locally, in parallel, according to routine practice. For a minimal κ coefficient of 0.7, reflecting acceptable concordance (precision ± 0.07), with an estimated 5% of non-exploitable data, 425 subjects were necessary.

Results

From July 2015 to December 2016, 425 patients were enrolled. For the 412 patients with available paired plasma and tumor samples, the κ coefficient was 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.77] and accuracy was 85.2% (95% CI, 81.4% to 88.5%). In the 329 patients with detectable ctDNA (at least one mutation or one methylated biomarker), the κ coefficient was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.84-0.94) and accuracy was 94.8% (95% CI, 91.9% to 97.0%). The absence of liver metastases was the main clinical factor associated with inconclusive circulating tumor DNA results [odds ratio = 0.11 (95% CI, 0.06-0.21)]. In patients with liver metastases, accuracy was 93.5% with NGS alone and 97% with NGS plus the methylated biomarkers.

Conclusion

This prospective trial demonstrates excellent concordance between RAS status in plasma and tumor tissue from patients with colorectal cancer and liver metastases, thus validating plasma testing for routine RAS mutation analysis in these patients.

Clinical Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02502656.

Accounting for Capacity Constraints in Economic Evaluations of Precision Medicine: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Precision (stratified or personalised) medicine is underpinned by the premise that it is feasible to identify known heterogeneity using a specific test or algorithm in patient populations and to use this information to guide patient care to improve health and well-being. This study aimed to understand if, and how, previous economic evaluations of precision medicine had taken account of the impact of capacity constraints.

METHODS

A meta-review was conducted of published systematic reviews of economic evaluations of precision medicine (test-treat interventions) and individual studies included in these reviews. Due to the volume of studies identified, a sample of papers published from 2007 to 2015 was collated. A narrative analysis identified whether potential capacity constraints were discussed qualitatively in the studies and, if relevant, which quantitative methods were used to account for capacity constraints.

RESULTS

A total of 45 systematic reviews of economic evaluations of precision medicine were identified, from which 222 studies focusing on test-treat interventions, published between 2007 and 2015, were extracted. Of these studies, 33 (15%) qualitatively discussed the potential impact of capacity constraints, including budget constraints; quality of tests and the testing process; ease of use of tests in clinical practice; and decision uncertainty. Quantitative methods (nine studies) to account for capacity constraints included static methods such as capturing inefficiencies in trials or models and sensitivity analysis around model parameters; and dynamic methods, which allow the impact of capacity constraints on cost effectiveness to change over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the cost effectiveness of precision medicine is necessary, but not sufficient, evidence for its successful implementation. There are currently few examples of evaluations that have quantified the impact of capacity constraints, which suggests an area of focus for future research.

Molecular biomarkers and precision medicine in colorectal cancer: a systematic review of health economic analyses

An increased understanding of the biology of colorectal cancer (CRC) has fuelled identification of biomarkers with potential to drive a stratified precision medicine care approach in this common malignancy. We conducted a systematic review of health economic assessments of molecular biomarkers (MBMs) and their employment in patient stratification in CRC. Our analysis revealed scenarios where health economic analyses have been applied to evaluate the cost effectiveness of MBM-guided clinical interventions: (i) evaluation of Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene (DPYD) status to identify patients susceptible to 5-Fluouracil toxicity; (ii) determination of Uridine 5'-diphospho- glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A1 gene (UGT1A1) polymorphism status to help guide irinotecan treatment; (iii) assessment of RAS/RAF mutational status to stratify patients for chemotherapy or Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) therapy and (iv) multigene expression analysis (Oncotype Dx) to identify and spare non-responders the debilitating effects of particular chemotherapy interventions. Our findings indicate that Oncotype Dx is cost-effective in high income settings within specific price points, by limiting treatment toxicity in CRC patients. DPYD status testing may also be cost effective in certain settings to avoid specific 5-FU toxicities post treatment. In contrast, current research does not support UGT1A1 polymorphism status as a cost-effective guide to irinotecan dosing, while the health economic evidence to support testing of KRAS/NRAS mutational status and chemo/EGFR therapy choice was inconclusive, despite its widespread adoption in CRC treatment management. However, we also show that there is a paucity of high-quality cost-effectiveness studies to support clinical application of precision medicine approaches in CRC.

Economic Value of Pharmacogenetic Testing for Cancer Drugs with Clinically Relevant Drug-Gene Associations: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Pharmacogenetic testing can provide predictive insights about the efficacy and safety of drugs used in cancer treatment. Although many drug-gene associations have been reported in the literature, the strength of evidence supporting each association can vary significantly. Even among the subgroup of drugs classified by the PharmGKB database to have a high or moderate level of evidence, there is limited information regarding the economic value of pharmacogenetic testing.

OBJECTIVES

To: (a) summarize the available pharmacoeconomic evidence assessing the value of pharmacogenetic testing for cancer drugs with clinically relevant drug-gene associations; (b) determine the quality of the studies that contain this evidence; and (c) discuss the quality of this evidence with respect to the level of evidence of the drug-gene associations.

METHODS

The PharmGKB database was used to identify cancer drugs with clinically relevant drug-gene associations graded high (1A, 1B) or moderate (2A, 2B). A systematic literature review was conducted using these drugs. Ovid MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched to identify cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, or cost-minimization studies comparing pharmacogenetic testing to an alternative. Cost and effect values from every relevant comparison within the studies were extracted, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was either extracted or calculated for each comparison. Quality assessment was conducted for each study using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. Qualitative synthesis was used to summarize the data.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2,191 citations, of which 35 studies met the inclusion criteria. Pharmacoeconomic studies were available for the following drugs from the PharmGKB database: fluoropyrimidine, 6-mercaptopurine, irinotecan, carboplatin, cisplatin, erlotinib, gefitinib, cetuximab, panitumumab, and trastuzumab. The studies were conducted in Asia, Europe, Canada, the United States, and Mexico and reported cost-utility, cost-effectiveness, and cost-minimization outcomes. The mean QHES score was 80 (SD = 22) for the studies of drug-gene pairs with high (1A, 1B) and moderate (2A, 2B) levels of evidence (1A = 82, 1B = 93, 2A = 71, and 2B = 74). There was variation across studies in terms of reporting. 109 relevant comparisons were identified within the studies. Of those that reported cost per life-year or cost per quality-adjusted life-year (n = 58 comparisons), pharmacogenetic testing was dominant in 21% overall and 42%, 21%, 17%, and 5% of the comparisons in Asia, Europe, Canada, and the United States, respectively. Variability was observed in the ICER values regardless of geographic region or drug. Pharmacogenetic testing was cost saving in 17 of 19 cost-minimization comparisons and was favored most frequently when compared with genetically indiscriminate strategies containing the drug of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

There was mixed evidence regarding the value of pharmacogenetic testing to guide cancer treatment. For future pharmacogenomic-related economic studies, we recommend prioritizing clinically relevant drug-gene associations and greater adherence to available best practice guidelines for conducting and reporting economic evaluation studies.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this review. Part of Hussain's research time was supported by a Merit Review Award (I01 BX000545), Medical Research Service, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Hussain also reports personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, and France Foundation, outside the submitted work. Onukwugha reports grants from Pfizer and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, along with advisory board fees from Novo Nordisk, outside the submitted work. Faruque, Neuberger, and Noh have nothing to disclose.

Personalized medicine in colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment: a systematic review of health economic evaluations

Background

Due to its epidemiological relevance, several studies have been performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tests and treatments in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.

Objective

We reviewed economic evaluations on diagnosis of inherited CRC-syndromes and genetic tests for the detection of mutations associated with response to therapeutics.

Methods

A systematic literature review was performed by searching the main literature databases for relevant papers on the field, published in the last 5 years.

Results

20 studies were included in the final analysis: 14 investigating the cost-effectiveness of hereditary-CRC screening; 5 evaluating the cost-effectiveness of KRAS mutation assessment before treatment; and 1 study analysing the cost-effectiveness of genetic tests for early-stage CRC patients prognosis. Overall, we found that: (a) screening strategies among CRC patients were more effective than no screening; (b) all the evaluated interventions were cost-saving for certain willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold; and (c) all new CRC patients diagnosed at age 70 or below should be screened. Regarding patients treatment, we found that KRAS testing is economically sustainable only if anticipated in patients with non-metastatic CRC (mCRC), while becoming unsustainable, due to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) beyond the levels of WTP-threshold, in all others evaluated scenarios.

Conclusions

The poor evidence in the field, combined to the number of assumptions done to perform the models, lead us to a high level of uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness of genetic evaluations in CRC, suggesting that major research is required in order to assess the best combination among detection tests, type of genetic test screening and targeted-therapy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12962-018-0085-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cost-Effectiveness of Cetuximab as First-line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the United States

PURPOSE

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis incorporating recent phase III clinical trial (FIRE-3) data to evaluate clinical and economic tradeoffs associated with first-line treatments of KRAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cost-effectiveness model was developed using FIRE-3 data to project survival and lifetime costs of FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab. Hypothetical KRAS-WT mCRC patients initiated first-line treatment and could experience adverse events, disease progression warranting second-line treatment, or clinical response and hepatic metastasectomy. Model inputs were derived from FIRE-3 and published literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were reported as US$ per life year (LY) and quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Scenario analyses considered patients with extended RAS mutations and CALGB/SWOG 80405 data; 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Compared with bevacizumab, KRAS-WT patients receiving first-line cetuximab gained 5.7 months of life at a cost of $46,266, for an ICER of $97,223/LY ($122,610/QALY). For extended RAS-WT patients, the ICER was $77,339/LY ($99,584/QALY). Cetuximab treatment was cost-effective 80.3% of the time, given a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/LY. Results were sensitive to changes in survival, treatment duration, and product costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of FIRE-3 data suggests that first-line treatment with cetuximab and FOLFIRI in KRAS (and extended RAS) WT mCRC patients may improve health outcomes and use financial resources more efficiently than bevacizumab and FOLFIRI. This information, in combination with other studies investigating comparative effectiveness of first-line options, can be useful to clinicians, payers, and policymakers in making treatment and resource allocation decisions for mCRC patients.

KRAS/BRAF基因与结肠癌糖代谢研究现状

正电子发射断层成像术(positron emission tomography, PET)/计算机断层扫描(computed tomography, CT)显像可用于结肠癌的诊断、监测疗效和预后评估. ¹⁸F标记葡萄糖(2-fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deeoxy-D-glucose, ¹⁸F-FDG)是PET/CT常用显像剂, 可以反映结肠癌活体组织葡萄糖代谢. KRAS/BRAF基因检测常用于结肠癌靶向治疗方案的选择及评估其治疗效果. 文献报道¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT显像可预测结肠癌KRAS/BRAF基因状态, 能以无创的方式预测结肠癌抗表皮生长因子受体靶向治疗效果. 目前国内有关KRAS/BRAF基因与结肠癌糖代谢的研究相对较少, 本文结合近期的相关文献进行概述.

RAS testing and cetuximab treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis in a setting with limited health resources

PURPOSE

To test the cost-effectiveness of cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) from a Chinese medical insurance perspective.

RESULTS

Baseline analysis showed that the addition of cetuximab increased quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) by 0.63, an increase of $17,086 relative to FOLFIRI chemotherapy, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $27,145/QALY. When the patient assistance program (PAP) was available, the ICER decreased to $14,049/QALY, which indicated that the cetuximab is cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of China ($22,200/QALY). One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the median overall survival time for the cetuximab was the most influential parameter.

METHODS

A Markov model by incorporating clinical, utility and cost data was developed to evaluate the economic outcome of cetuximab in mCRC. The lifetime horizon was used, and sensitivity analyses were carried out to test the robustness of the model results. The impact of PAP was also evaluated in scenario analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

RAS testing with cetuximab treatment is likely to be cost-effective for patients with mCRC when PAP is available in China.