Cost-Effectiveness of Nivolumab in Recurrent Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Cost-effectiveness analysis of PD-1 inhibitors as second-line therapy for advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in China: an economic evaluation based on network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several economic studies have assessed the cost-effectiveness of programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors compared to second-line chemotherapy in treating esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, there is a lack of economic comparisons among the different PD-1 inhibitors.

AIM

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of PD-1 inhibitors (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, camrelizumab, and tislelizumab) in second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic ESCC within the Chinese healthcare system.

METHOD

The clinical trials were systematically retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. We established a fractional polynomials model to conduct a network meta-analysis, enabling the calculation of hazard ratios and expected survival rates. Economic outcomes were estimated using a partitioned survival model. The costs and utilities were gathered from published sources. The threshold for willingness-to-pay (WTP) for a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was set at three times China's per capita gross domestic product in 2022. Sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed to address uncertainties in the model.

RESULTS

Four phase III randomized controlled trials were included, evaluating the cost-effectiveness of four PD-1 inhibitors, camrelizumab, nivolumab, tislelizumab, and pembrolizumab, compared to chemotherapy for the second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic ESCC. For camrelizumab, nivolumab, tislelizumab, and pembrolizumab, the corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $27,375.43/QALY, $205,312.19/QALY, $9,266.73/QALY, and $220,368.10/QALY, respectively. The SA results indicated the robustness of the base analysis findings.

CONCLUSION

From the Chinese healthcare system, under the WTP of $38,253.48/QALY, tislelizumab is a cost-effective treatment option for the second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic ESCC.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus the EXTREME regimen in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a cost-effectiveness analysis

In the CheckMate 651 study, nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus EXTREME (cisplatin/carboplatin + cetuximab + fluorouracil) regimen was compared for effectiveness. It is not known whether these immunotherapy agents are cost-effective for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN). The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with EXTREME in the first-line setting from the standpoint of third-party payers in the United States. The projecting of costs and outcomes over 15 years was done using a three-state partitioned survival model discounted by 3% per year. Long-term extrapolation of CheckMate 651 was used to model progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). The incremental net health benefit (INHB), incremental net monetary benefit (INMB), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. The uncertainty and stability of the model were accounted for via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. As compared with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, EXTREME was associated with an increase of 0.154 life-years and 0.076 QALYs, as well as a cost increase of $572 per patient. The corresponding ICERs were $7545/QALY along with the values of INMB and INHB were $113,267 and 0.076 QALYs, respectively, at a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY. The probability of nivolumab plus ipilimumab being cost-effective was > 99% in patients with combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 1, CPS 1-19, or CPS ≥ 20. Moreover, hazard ratio for OS and body weight were the most sensitive parameters for the model. According to sensitivity analyses, these results were generally robust. In overall populations with R/M SCCHN, the EXTREME regimen is cost-effective compared with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Given a WTP threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the probability of the EXTREME regiment being cost-effective compared with nivolumab and ipilimumab, was 64%. Importantly, there was heterogeneity in the cost-effectiveness probabilities, based on primary sites and expression levels of PD-L1. Therefore, tailored treatment based on individual patient and clinical characteristics, remains important, and may impact the cost-effectiveness of the regimens under study.

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatment Optimisation with Biomarkers for Immunotherapy in Solid Tumours: A Systematic Review

This study investigated the health economic evaluations of predictive biomarker testing in solid tumours treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from June 2010 to February 2022, 58 relevant articles were reviewed out of the 730 screened. The focus was predominantly on non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (65%) and other solid tumours (40%). Among the NSCLC studies, 21 out of 35 demonstrated cost-effectiveness, notably for pembrolizumab as first-line treatment when preceded by PD-L1 assessment, cost-effective at a threshold of $100,000/QALY compared to the standard of care. However, for bladder, cervical, and triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs), no economic evaluations met the affordability threshold of $100,000/QALY. Overall, the review highlights a certain degree of uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness of ICI. In particular, we found PD-L1 expression associated with ICI treatment to be a cost-effective strategy, particularly in NSCLC, urothelial, and renal cell carcinoma. The findings suggest the potential value of predictive biomarker testing, specifically with pembrolizumab in NSCLC, while indicating challenges in achieving cost-effectiveness for certain other solid tumours.

Exploring long-term responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors in recurrent and metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have introduced a new era in the treatment of recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). Optimal duration for ICI therapy is still unclear and the long-term outcomes and toxicity in patients responding to these therapies warrant further exploration. This study attempts to identify the clinical and biological determinants of a durable response and evaluate outcomes following ICI treatment discontinuation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 181 patients treated with ICI for R/M HNSCC was conducted. Long-term responders were defined as patients who sustained disease control at least two years after initiating ICI therapy. We compared clinical and biological characteristics associated with these long-term responders against the broader treatment population.

RESULTS

10 % of R/M HNSCC patients treated with ICIs demonstrated a durable long-term response. Only three relapses (16 %) occurred after discontinuing ICI treatment in this subset, with a median follow-up of 52 months. Upon retreatment with ICI, two attained a documented response. Extended ICI response was observed even with < 2 years of treatment. 74 % of long-term responders experienced immune-related adverse events (irAEs), 37 % of which severe irAEs. Hypothyroidism was the most frequently reported irAEs. The predictive potential of systemic inflammation indices for clinical response appears to be limited.

CONCLUSIONS

ICI present an optimistic avenue for HNSCC patients, offering substantial long-term responses. The study suggests that a two-year treatment could be optimal and irAEs, although common, are typically mild.

Sensitivity Analysis in Economic Evaluations of Immuno-Oncology Drugs: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to review, assess, and report the characteristics and strategies of sensitivity analyses (SAs) that were performed in the context of published economic evaluations of immuno-oncology drugs.

METHODS

The systematic literature search was conducted in Scopus and MEDLINE for articles published from 2005 to 2021. Study selection, based on a predefined set of criteria, was performed by 2 reviewers independently. We included economic evaluations of Food and Drug Administration-approved immuno-oncology drugs that were published in English and assessed the accompanying SAs on a set of items, including the range justification of the baseline parameters within the deterministic SA, the provisions for the correlation/overlay between parameters, and the justification of the chosen parameter distribution for the probabilistic SA, among others.

RESULTS

A total of 98 of 295 publications met the inclusion criteria. A total of 90 studies included a one-way and probabilistic SA and 16 of 98 studies had one-way and scenario analysis, alone or together with probabilistic analysis. Most studies provide explicit references as to the choice of parameters and values; nevertheless, there is a lack of a reference of correlation/overlay between parameters in most of the evaluations. In 26 of 98 studies, the most influential parameter for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was the under-evaluation drug cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of included articles contained an SA that was implemented according to commonly accepted published guidance. The under-evaluation drug cost, the estimates of progression-free survival, the hazard ratio for overall survival, and the time horizon of the analysis seem to play an important part in the robustness of the outcomes.

Decoding the influence of the immune system and immunotherapy targets on carcinomas: A hidden prism in oral cancer therapy

In recent decades, understanding tumorigenesis and the complex interaction between the host and the immune system has been the pillar for significant advances in anticancer therapy. Conventional anticancer therapy (e.g., cut, burn, and cytotoxic drugs) involves multiple targeting of tumor cells. However, the tumor tissue microenvironment can present a dysregulated, stimulating, or subverted immune response which, in turn, reveals pro-tumor activities favoring tumor expansion and progression. Recently, new potential targets have been identified based on immunomodulatory therapies, which are crafted to re-establish the host anti-tumoral immune response. Clinicians should fully understand the intricate interactions between carcinogens, the tumor milieu, the immune system, and traditional anticancer therapies in order to progress and to overcome the refractory/recurrent challenges and morbidity of the disease. Thus, in this article, we highlight the complex milieu of the oral cancer immune response, pointing out potential therapeutic immunotargets for oral squamous cell carcinomas. The impact of traditional anticancer therapy on the immune system is also outlined.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of personalised versus standard dosimetry for selective internal radiation therapy with TheraSphere in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Aims

To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) comparing personalised dosimetry with standard dosimetry in the context of selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) with TheraSphere for the management of adult patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from the Italian Healthcare Service perspective.

Materials and methods

A partition survival model was developed to project costs and the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a lifetime horizon. Clinical inputs were retrieved from a published randomised controlled trial. Health resource utilisation inputs were extracted from the questionnaires administered to clinicians in three oncology centres in Italy, respectively. Cost parameters were based on Italian official tariffs.

Results

Over a lifetime horizon, the model estimated the average QALYs of 1.292 and 0.578, respectively, for patients undergoing personalised and standard dosimetry approaches. The estimated mean costs per patient were €23,487 and €19,877, respectively. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of personalised versus standard dosimetry approaches was €5,056/QALY.

Conclusions

Personalised dosimetry may be considered a cost-effective option compared to standard dosimetry for patients undergoing SIRT for HCC in Italy. These findings provide evidence for clinicians and payers on the value of personalised dosimetry as a treatment option for patients with HCC.

Nivolumab Versus Sorafenib as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Objective: Nivolumab improves overall survival (OS) and is associated with fewer adverse events than sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). However, the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab compared with sorafenib treatment for aHCC remains unclear. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and sorafenib in the treatment of aHCC.

Materials and methods: A partitioned survival model that included three mutually exclusive health states was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and sorafenib for treating aHCC. The clinical characteristics and outcomes of the patients in the model were obtained from the CheckMate 459. We performed deterministic one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to evaluate the robustness of the model. Subgroup analyses were also performed. Costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefits (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB) were measured.

Results: The base case analysis showed that compared with sorafenib, treatment with nivolumab was associated with an increment of 0.50 (2.45 vs. 1.95) life-years and an increment of 0.32 (1.59 vs. 1.27) QALYs, as well as a $69,762 increase in cost per patient. The ICER was $220,864/QALY. The INHB and INMB were −0.15 QALYs and −$22,362 at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY, respectively. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the probability of nivolumab being cost-effective was only 10.38% at a WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY. The model was most sensitive to the costs of sorafenib and nivolumab according to the one-way sensitivity analysis. When the price of sorafenib exceeded $0.93/mg or nivolumab was less than $24.23/mg, nivolumab was more cost-effective. The subgroup analysis illustrated that the probability of cost-effectiveness was >50% in the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage B subgroups for nivolumab at a WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY. This study also showed that the probability of cost-effectiveness was <50% in most subgroups.

Conclusion: Nivolumab was not cost-effective, although it was associated with better clinical benefit and a favorable safety profile for the treatment of aHCC compared with sorafenib from the third-party payer perspective in the United States. If the price of nivolumab is substantially reduced, favorable cost-effectiveness can be achieved among patients with aHCC.

Pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy versus cetuximab plus chemotherapy to treat recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: An updated KEYNOTE-048 based cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVES

Recently, updated data from KEYNOTE-048 revealed that pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy could improve progression-free survival (PFS)2 compared with cetuximab plus chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Markov structure was conducted to evaluate the cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy vs. cetuximab plus chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic HNSCC from the United States payer's perspective. Total cost, health outcomes, and incremental cost-effective ratios (ICERs) were estimated. Additional analyses were conducted in the total population and in two different programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive scores (CPSs) (≥1 and ≥ 20) population. Sensitivity analysis were used to test the stability of the model.

RESULTS

When compared with cetuximab plus chemotherapy, the pembrolizumab monotherapy strategy was dominated by lower cost and better efficacy in all three populations. The incremental costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) yielded by pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy compared with cetuximab plus chemotherapy were $16016.88 and 0.11 in the total population, and $24467.47 and 0.18 and $30448.46 and 0.20 in the populations with a PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 and CPS ≥ 20, respectively, leading to ICERs of $147876.14, $134237.84, and $153660.78 per QALY, respectively.

CONCLUSION

First-line treatment with pembrolizumab or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy are cost-effective strategies compared with cetuximab plus chemotherapy when the value of willingness-to-pay (WTP) was $150000 per QALY for the total and PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 populations with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC.

Balancing the efficacy vs. the toxicity of promiscuous natural products: Paclitaxel-based acid-labile lipophilic prodrugs as promising chemotherapeutics

TumorSelect® is an anticancer technology that combines cytotoxics, nanotechnology, and knowledge of human physiology to develop innovative therapeutic interventions with minimal undesirable side effects commonly observed in conventional chemotherapy. Tumors have a voracious appetite for cholesterol which facilitates tumor growth and fuels their proliferation. We have transformed this need into a stealth delivery system to disguise and deliver anticancer drugs with the assistance of both the human body and the tumor cell. Several designer prodrugs are incorporated within pseudo-LDL nanoparticles, which carry them to tumor tissues, are taken up, internalized, transformed into active drugs, and inhibit cancer cell proliferation. Highly lipophilic prodrug conjugates of paclitaxel suitable for incorporation into the pseudo-LDL nanoparticles of the TumorSelect® delivery vehicle formulation were designed, synthesized, and evaluated in the panel of 24-h NCI-60 human tumor cell line screening to demonstrate the power of such an innovative approach. Taxane prodrugs, viz., ART-207 was synthesized by tethering paclitaxel to lipid moiety with the aid of a racemic solketal as a linker in cost-effective, simple, and straightforward synthetic transformations. In addition to the typical 24-h NCI screening protocol, these compounds were assessed for growth inhibition or killing of ovarian cell lines for 48 and 72h-time intervals and identified the long-lasting effectiveness of these lipophilic prodrugs. All possible, enantiomerically pure isomers of ART-207 were also synthesized, and cytotoxicities were biosimilar to racemic ART-207, suggesting that enantiopurity of linker has a negligible effect on cell proliferation. To substantiate further, ART-207 was evaluated for its in vivo tumor reduction efficacy by studying the xenograft model of ovarian cancer grown in SCID mice. Reduced weight loss (a measure of toxicity) in the ART-207 group was observed, even though it was dosed at 2.5x the paclitaxel equivalent of Abraxane®. As a result, our delineated approach is anticipated to improve patient quality of life, patient retention in treatment regimes, post-treatment rapid recovery, and overall patient compliance without compromising the efficacy of the cytotoxic promiscuous natural products.

Shooting at Moving and Hidden Targets-Tumour Cell Plasticity and the Notch Signalling Pathway in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas

Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC) is often aggressive, with poor response to current therapies in approximately 40-50% of the patients. Current therapies are restricted to operation and irradiation, often combined with a small number of standard-of-care chemotherapeutic drugs, preferentially for advanced tumour patients. Only very recently, newer targeted therapies have entered the clinics, including Cetuximab, which targets the EGF receptor (EGFR), and several immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the immune receptor PD-1 and its ligand PD-L1. HNSCC tumour tissues are characterized by a high degree of intra-tumour heterogeneity (ITH), and non-genetic alterations that may affect both non-transformed cells, such as cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), and transformed carcinoma cells. This very high degree of heterogeneity likely contributes to acquired drug resistance, tumour dormancy, relapse, and distant or lymph node metastasis. ITH, in turn, is likely promoted by pronounced tumour cell plasticity, which manifests in highly dynamic and reversible phenomena such as of partial or hybrid forms of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), and enhanced tumour stemness. Stemness and tumour cell plasticity are strongly promoted by Notch signalling, which remains poorly understood especially in HNSCC. Here, we aim to elucidate how Notch signal may act both as a tumour suppressor and proto-oncogenic, probably during different stages of tumour cell initiation and progression. Notch signalling also interacts with numerous other signalling pathways, that may also have a decisive impact on tumour cell plasticity, acquired radio/chemoresistance, and metastatic progression of HNSCC. We outline the current stage of research related to Notch signalling, and how this pathway may be intricately interconnected with other, druggable targets and signalling mechanisms in HNSCC.

Considerations for Clinical Trials Testing Radiotherapy Combined With Immunotherapy for Metastatic Disease

Metastatic cancer is inherently heterogeneous, and patients with metastatic disease can experience vastly different oncologic outcomes depending on several patient- and disease-specific characteristics. Designing trials for such a diverse population is challenging yet necessary to improve treatment outcomes for metastatic-previously thought to be incurable-disease. Here we review core considerations for designing and conducting clinical trials involving radiation therapy and immunotherapy for patients with metastatic cancer.

Nivolumab vs Pembrolizumab for Treatment of US Patients With Platinum-Refractory Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Network Meta-analysis and Cost-effectiveness Analysis

Importance

Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are approved for treating platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). Physicians and patients are uncertain which drug is preferable, rendering a cost-effectiveness comparison between them necessary.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab vs pembrolizumab in treating platinum-refractory R/M HNSCC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Both the network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis included patients from the CheckMate 141 and the KEYNOTE 040 phase 3 randomized clinical trials. The Checkmate 141 trial started on May 1, 2014, with the present analysis based on a September 2017 data cutoff. The KEYNOTE 040 trial started on November 17, 2014, with the present analysis based on a May 15, 2017, data cutoff. A bayesian network meta-analysis that included 856 patients was carried out, and a cost-effectiveness analysis that included 487 patients was conducted by developing a partitioned survival model, both between February and November 2020. The robustness of the model was assessed via 1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses; subgroup analyses were included; and scenario analyses were conducted to investigate the associations of dosage adjustment of nivolumab with cost-effectiveness.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), overall costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were measured.

Results

In the cost-effectiveness analysis that included 487 patients, for US health care payers, when nivolumab was administered based on patient weight (3 mg/kg biweekly), at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100 000 per QALY, the probability of nivolumab being cost-effective compared with pembrolizumab was 56%; at a WTP threshold of $150 000 per QALY, the probability was 62%. When nivolumab was administered at a fixed dose of 240 mg biweekly or 480 mg monthly, at a WTP threshold of $100 000 per QALY, the probability of nivolumab being cost-effective was 42% to 45%; at a WTP threshold of $150 000 per QALY, the probability was 52% to 55%.

Conclusions and Relevance

Findings from this network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis suggest considering both WTP threshold and patient body weight when choosing between nivolumab and pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with platinum-refractory R/M HNSCC. When the WTP threshold was $100 000 per QALY, for patients weighing less than 72 kg, nivolumab (3 mg/kg, biweekly) was considered cost-effective; otherwise, pembrolizumab was preferable. When the WTP threshold was $150 000 per QALY, nivolumab (3 mg/kg biweekly) was considered cost-effective for patients weighing less than 75 kg; otherwise, fixed-dose nivolumab (240 mg biweekly or 480 mg monthly) provided more cost savings.

Cost-effectiveness of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab vs Sorafenib for Patients With Unresectable or Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma

IMPORTANCE

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as a first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma has been shown to improve overall and progression-free survival compared with standard sorafenib treatment. However, because of the high cost of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, assessment of its value by considering both efficacy and cost is needed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs sorafenib for patients with unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma from a US payer perspective.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This economic evaluation was performed from June through September 2020, with a 6-year investment time period. Hypothetical patients were male and female adults 18 years or older who had a diagnosis of locally advanced metastatic or unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma confirmed by histologic or clinical features.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Health care costs (adjusted to 2020 US dollars), life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs sorafenib were examined using a partitioned survival model. One-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine model uncertainty. The model was also used to estimate price reductions of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab that would achieve more favorable cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis of a hypothetical sample of 424 patients, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with an increase of 0.623 life-years (1.840 vs 1.218 life-years) and 0.484 QALYs (1.412 vs 0.928 QALYs) and with an incremental cost of $156 210 per patient compared with sorafenib. The ICER was $322 500 per QALY (5th to 95th percentile, $149 364-$683 744 per QALY), with 0.6% and 5.1% chance of being cost-effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $100 000 and $150 000 per QALY, respectively. The ICER never decreased below $150 000 per QALY in the 1-way sensitivity analyses. To achieve more favorable cost-effectiveness under the thresholds of $150 000 to $100 000 per QALY, the prices of atezolizumab and bevacizumab would need to be reduced by 37% to 47%.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this economic evaluation, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with clinical benefit but was not cost-effective compared with sorafenib for first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma from a US payer perspective. A substantial reduction in price for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab would be needed to achieve favorable cost-effectiveness for this new therapy.

PD-L1 expression in recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

To evaluate the Programmed Cell Death Ligand (PD-L1) expression at diagnosis and relapse in patients with head and neck carcinoma (HNSCC) treated with radio(chemo)therapy.

METHODS

PD-L1 immunohistochemistry was performed in tumor cells (TC) and immune cells (IC) in 44 patients and scored as 0 = 0%, 1 =  < 5%, 2 = 6-49% or 3 =  ≥ 50% cells.

RESULTS

PD-L1 expression on TC before RT was scored as 0, 1, 2 and 3 in 28, 4, 8 and 4 patients, respectively. In 10 patients, IC did not show any PD-L1 expression; while in 8, 16, and 10 patients, PD-L1 expression was scored 1, 2 and 3, respectively. At relapse, 7/36 patients had a PD-L1 expression positivation in TC, while the opposite was observed in 6 patients. Overall, survival at 2 years was higher in patients with PD-L1 expression (90% versus 62.5%, p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

PD-L1 expression may vary throughout the course of the disease. A re-evaluation of PD-L1 expression on biopsies at the time of recurrence should be recommended.

Emerging immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of head and neck cancers

Introduction: The benefits of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have been demonstrated through multiple studies to improve overall survival (OS) with decreased side effects when compared to the standard of care (SOC) treatment regimens in place for decades, leading to the approval of two ICIs, nivolumab and pembrolizumab. There has been a subsequent influx in the development of novel immunotherapy agents for the treatment of HNSCC. Areas covered: Data for anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) antibodies in treatment of R/M HNSCC will be reviewed. Emerging immune checkpoint inhibitors as well as combined therapies in HNSCC will be discussed. The role of predictive biomarkers, HPV-status, PD-L1 expression, and challenges related to treating patients with ICIs will be summarized. Expert opinion: A shift toward ICIs as SOC for the treatment of R/M HNSCC will continue as emerging immune checkpoints and combination therapies are evaluated. Response rates are variable in this patient population underlying the importance of identifying predictive biomarkers to aid in patient selection for ICI treatment.

Institutional financial toxicity of failure to adhere to treatment guidelines for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Delays in treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) are known to increase disease recurrence, generating the need for additional salvage treatment, often with immunotherapy.

METHODS

Three treatment metrics were identified: time from diagnosis to treatment initiation (TTI), time from surgery to postoperative radiotherapy (surg → PORT), and total treatment package time (TPT). Financial toxicity was calculated using hazard ratios, pembrolizumab cost, and dosing data for a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) institutional cohort (n = 338) and a standardized cohort (n = 100).

RESULTS

Estimated financial toxicity for the VHA cohort was $2 047 407, $316 545, and $1 114 101 for TTI, surg → PORT, and TPT, respectively. Estimated financial toxicity for the standardized patient cohort was $454 028, $544 576, and $1 879 628 for TTI, surg → PORT, and TPT, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure to meet established HNSCC treatment metrics generates significant, yet avoidable, institutional financial toxicity which is particularly relevant to integrated single-payer systems such as the VHA in the modern immunotherapy era.

Economic evaluations of cancer immunotherapy: a systematic review and quality evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Scientific advances in the last decade have highlighted the use of immunotherapy, especially immune checkpoint inhibitors, to be an effective strategy in cancer therapy. However, these immunotherapeutic agents are expensive, and their use must take into account economic criteria. Thus, the objective of the present study was to systematically identify and review published EE related to the use of ipilimumab, nivolumab or pembrolizumab in melanoma, lung cancer, head and neck cancer or renal cell carcinoma, and to assess their quality.

METHODS

The systematic literature research was conducted on Medline via PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify economic evaluations published before July 2018. The quality of each selected economic evaluation was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Drummond checklist.

RESULTS

Our systematic review was based on 32 economic evaluations using different methodological approaches, different perspectives and different time horizons. Three-quarters of the economic evaluations are full (n = 24) with a Drummond score ≥ 7, synonymous of "high quality". Among them, 66% reported a strategy that was cost-effective. The most assessed immunotherapeutic agent was nivolumab. In patients with renal cell carcinoma or head and neck cancer, it was less likely to be cost-effective than in patients with melanoma or lung cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Whether or not these findings will be confirmed remains to be seen when market approval to cover more indications is extended and new effective immunotherapeutic agents become available.

Pembrolizumab alone or with chemotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A cost-effectiveness analysis from Chinese perspective

OBJECTIVES

The KEYNOTE-048 trial indicated pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy is an appropriate first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), while pembrolizumab monotherapy is optimal for PD-L1 positive patient. This study was powered to determine the most cost-effective strategy for patient with different combined positive score (CPS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Markov model was developed to predict progression-free survival, disease progression, or death in patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC based on data from the KEYNOTE-048 trial. Cost was obtained from West China Hospital, while utilities were referred to published studies. By using Monte Carlo simulations, acceptability curves were depicted to address the uncertainty of model inputs.

RESULTS

Compared with cetuximab plus chemotherapy, pembrolizumab monotherapy resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $14,995 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) in total population and $22,779 per QALY in patients with CPS ≥ 1. Comparing pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy with standard therapy led to an ICER of $43,230 per QALY in total population and $26,157 per QALY in patients with CPS ≥ 1. For patients with CPS ≥ 20, ICERs yield by immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy exceeded the threshold of willingness to pay we set, when compared with standard therapy. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was dominated by pembrolizumab alone in this patient population.

CONCLUSION

For HNSCC patients with different CPS, pembrolizumab alone was the optimal choice for total population and patients with CPS ≥ 1. Among patients with high CPS, immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy was not preferred over the standard therapy.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of nivolumab for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in the United States

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab monotherapy for recurrent/metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) in the US.Methods: We constructed a cohort-based partitioned survival model for three health states (progression-free, progressed disease, and death). Using overall survival and progression-free survival data from the nivolumab and investigator's choice (IC) arms of the CheckMate 141 study, the proportion of patients in each health state was estimated by parametric modeling over a 25-year period. Cost, utility, adverse event, and disease management data inputs were obtained from relevant literature and applied to patients in each health state. A scenario analysis was conducted assuming increased uptake of subsequent immunotherapies. A one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of variation in multiple parameters. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis in which probabilistic distributions were applied to each input during 1,000 model iterations was also conducted.Results: Total costs incurred were higher with nivolumab ($101,552) than with IC ($38,067). Nivolumab was associated with a higher number of life-years (LY; 1.21) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs; 0.89), compared with IC (0.68 and 0.42, respectively). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for nivolumab compared with IC was $134,438 per QALY, and this remained qualitatively similar when increased uptake of subsequent immunotherapies was assumed ($129,603 per QALY). Sensitivity analyses supported these findings.Conclusions: These results suggest that, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, nivolumab is a cost-effective option for therapy of SCCHN in the US.

Real-world treatment patterns, cost of care and effectiveness of therapies for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck pre and post approval of immuno-oncology agents

Aims: In 2016, nivolumab and pembrolizumab were approved for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) following progression after initial platinum-based therapy. We sought to explore the uptake, effectiveness, and impact on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and total costs of care pre and post introduction of immuno-oncology (IO) agents.Materials and Methods: Recurrent/metastatic SCCHN patients were identified from a healthcare claims clearinghouse by selecting patients with a claim for distant metastases or who initiated systemic therapy at least 120 days following discontinuation of platinum-based therapy. Two cohorts were created according to the date of post-platinum therapy (PPT) initiation: pre-IO = 08/01/2014-07/31/2015; post-IO = 08/01/2016-07/31/2017. Treatment patterns and effectiveness (duration of treatment, time to next treatment) during first-line (1 L) PPT, HRU, and costs were compared between propensity-score matched patients from each cohort.Results: Of 716 patients identified (pre-IO = 265, post-IO = 451) 46.3% of post-IO patients received IO post-platinum. In 229 matched patients 20.0% of the post-IO compared to 10.7% of the pre-IO (p=.02) had at least a 6 month duration of 1 L PPT. Inpatient admissions during 1 L PPT: 34.1% post-IO versus 48.0% pre-IO (p= <.01). PPPM total costs of care in 1 L PPT were significantly greater post-IO ($11,535) compared to pre-IO ($9,054, p=.002). Time to next treatment (from 1 L PPT start) was 6.1 months pre-IO versus 7.4 months post-IO (p=.046).Limitations: Recurrent SCCHN patients were identified using a validated claims-based algorithm but misclassification may occur. Requiring patients to have received 1 L PPT the pre-IO cohort may be systematically different that the post-IO cohort as pre-IO patients were more likely to have not received further treatment beyond 1 L PPT.Conclusions: The significant uptake of IO therapy resulted in longer durations of therapy, lower rates of hospitalizations although higher treatment costs. The results suggest IO treatment provides additional clinical benefits to recurrent/metastatic SCCHN patients.

A comparative study of nivolumab and axitinib in terms of overall survival, treatment continuation, and cost for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Nivolumab and axitinib has recommended as a second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) after tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. In this study, overall survival (OS), treatment continuation, and the cost of nivolumab and axitinib-the second-line treatment agents for mRCC-were compared and examined. Herein, we retrospectively surveyed patients with pathologically confirmed mRCC, treated with nivolumab (n=9) or axitinib (n=16) at Ogaki Municipal Hospital (Ogaki, Japan) between January 2012 and May 2019. The treatment periods for the nivolumab- and axitinib-administered groups were 5.4 (range: 1.4-21.3) and 3.4 (range: 0.3-28.1) months, respectively (P=0.089). The postponement periods for the nivolumab- and axitinib-administered groups were 7 (range: 0-186) and 0 (range: 0-262) days, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.008). The median OS for patients treated with nivolumab and axitinib was 12.3 (range: 1.5-25.5 months) and 9.2 (range: 2.2-55.0 months) months, respectively (P=0.633). The one-year cost estimates for axitinib and nivolumab in clinical practice were $60,694.2 and $86,544.4, respectively (P=0.017). We found that despite frequent interruptions in nivolumab administration and a longer postpaonement period for the nivolumab-administered group than for the axitinib-administered group, both groups exhibit comparable treatment duration and OS.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin in the first-line setting for Chinese patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma

PURPOSE

A randomized phase III trial demonstrated that gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival compared with fluorouracil plus cisplatin (FP) as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). The cost-effectiveness analysis was designed to identify the economic option for metastatic NPC from a Chinese societal perspective.

METHODS

We established a Markov model that involved three health states representing the stages of disease to simulate therapy. Survival data of clinical outcomes were derived from the trial and adjusted to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Transition probabilities and health utilities were obtained from the clinical trial and published literatures. The cost-effective strategy was estimated for these treatments using a willing-to-pay (WTP) threshold. A one-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to study the influences of parameters.

RESULTS

GP treatment group produced a gain of 0.37 QALYs with an incremental cost of $2520.80, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $6812.97 per QALY, compared with FP treatment ($15,530.96 versus $13,010.16). The ICER was lower than the accepted WTP threshold, which was 3 times gross domestic product per capita of China ($25,749 per QALY).

CONCLUSION

GP regimen is more cost-effective compared with FP regimen as the first-line treatment for Chinese patients with metastatic NPC.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of Pembrolizumab In The Treatment Of Advanced Recurrent Metastatic Head And Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma In China And The United States

BACKGROUND

Pembrolizumab, a programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor, has recently gained prominence as a second-line treatment for recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell cancer (R/M HNSCC). This study compares the acceptance and different influencing factors of pembrolizumab in the treatment of R/M HNSCC in developed (i.e., the United States) and developing (i.e., China) countries through cost-effectiveness analysis and provides valuable suggestions for clinical decision making.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed using TreeAge Pro 2015 software to evaluate the economic value of four treatment strategies. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were used as economic indicators for incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. The stability of the model was evaluated by one-way sensitivity and probability sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The ICERs for the pembrolizumab group versus PD-L1 CPS treatment in China and the US were $7892/QALY and $11,900/QALY, respectively. All ICERs were less than the threshold of $29,306 in China and $50,000 in the US; thus, pembrolizumab is cost effective. Sensitivity analysis confirmed a stable economic advantage in the single-drug regimen of pembrolizumab in China and the US.

CONCLUSION

Pembrolizumab monotherapy as a second-line treatment for R/M HNSCC presents more health benefits in comparison with the standard, PD-L1 TPS and PD-L1 CPS groups in China and the US.

A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background

Escalating healthcare costs are necessitating the practice of value-based oncology. It is crucial to critically evaluate the economic impact of influential but expensive therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). To date, no systematic assessment of the cost-effectiveness (CE) of ICIs has been performed.

Methods

PRISMA-guided systematic searches of the PubMed database were conducted. Studies of head/neck (n = 3), lung (n = 5), genitourinary (n = 4), and melanoma (n = 8) malignancies treated with ICIs were evaluated. The reference willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was $100,000/QALY.

Results

Nivolumab was not cost-effective over chemotherapy for recurrent/metastatic head/neck cancers (HNCs). For non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), nivolumab was not cost-effective for a general cohort, but increased PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in CE. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for both previously treated and newly-diagnosed metastatic NSCLC. For genitourinary cancers (GUCs, renal cell and bladder cancers), nivolumab and pembrolizumab were not cost-effective options. Regarding metastatic/unresected melanoma, ipilimumab monotherapy is less cost-effective than nivolumab, nivolumab/ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab. The addition of ipilimumab to nivolumab monotherapy was not adequately cost-effective. Pembrolizumab or nivolumab monotherapy offered comparable CE profiles.

Conclusions

With limited data and from the reference WTP, nivolumab was not cost-effective for HNCs. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for NSCLC; although not the case for nivolumab, applying PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in adequate CE. Most data for nivolumab and pembrolizumab in GUCs did not point towards adequate CE. Contrary to ipilimumab, either nivolumab or pembrolizumab is cost-effective for melanoma. Despite these conclusions, it cannot be overstated that careful patient selection is critical for CE. Future publication of CE investigations and clinical trials (along with longer follow-up of existing data) could substantially alter conclusions from this analysis.

Immunotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer in the Era of Exponentially Increasing Health Care Expenditure

The FDA‐approved immune checkpoint inhibitors, nivolumab and pembrolizumab, are the most recent biological therapies in the therapeutic armamentarium for recurrent metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. This article highlights the tools for analyzing the costeffectiveness of such therapies.