US cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin, bendamustine and rituximab in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

A Systematic Literature Review of Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes and Associated Utility Values in Relapsed and/or Refractory Large B Cell Lymphoma

BACKGROUND

In this ever-expanding treatment landscape, there is a lack of consolidated health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes and utility reports in relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B cell lymphoma (LBCL) to inform health care policy and decision-maker assessments for both old and new products. These assessments can have a direct effect on what treatment options are available to patients and physicians.

OBJECTIVE

A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to understand the HRQOL evidence for treatments in R/R LBCL and identify associated health utility values.

METHODS

The SLR searched and screened literature published from 1 January 2003 to 2 May 2022. Studies were screened based on Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Study design criteria established a priori and were assessed by two independent reviewers; quality assessments of the evidence were performed in accordance with health technology assessment recommendations from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Several types of therapies were included, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell products (lisocabtagene maraleucel, axicabtagene ciloleucel, tisagenlecleucel), novel therapies (selinexor, nivolumab, polatuzumab vedotin, and bendamustine), salvage therapies, and rituximab.

RESULTS

The review identified 33 unique studies reporting HRQOL, including 15 economic studies that reported health state utility values, 9 clinical trials, 7 health technology assessment reports, and 1 each of a vignette-based study and a point-in-time survey. Improvements in general and/or lymphoma-specific HRQOL measures were observed with CAR T cell therapy in both the second-line and third-line or later settings. On-treatment utility values for CAR T cell therapies ranged from 0.50 to 0.74. Values for remission/progression-free survival (0.70-0.90) and for disease progression (0.39-0.59) were similar across studies. For novel therapies, utility values were 0.83 for progression-free survival and ranged from 0.39 to 0.71 for disease progression. On-treatment utility values for salvage chemotherapy ranged from 0.63 to 0.67.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the evidence synthesized in this SLR provides a comprehensive understanding of the HRQOL evidence in R/R LBCL. This article identified several sources for utility values in the published literature showing variation in the HRQOL outcomes for patients across a variety of therapeutics. Treatment of R/R LBCL with CAR T cell therapies was associated with improvement in health utility values. Mixed results were found for novel therapies and salvage therapies. More data are needed as new therapies are used in this patient population to inform treatment decision-making.

Cost-effectiveness of second-line lisocabtagene maraleucel in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

ABSTRACT

Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, received the US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2022 for second-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) for patients with refractory disease or early relapse after first-line chemoimmunotherapy. This decision was based on the TRANSFORM study demonstrating improvements in event-free survival with liso-cel compared with standard care. Given the high costs of CAR T-cell therapies, particularly as they transition to second-line treatment, a cost-effectiveness analysis is essential to determine their economic viability. The study used a partitioned survival model with standard parametric functions to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of liso-cel aganist platinum-based chemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation over a lifetime horizon The analysis relied on data from the TRANSFORM and TRANSCEND trials, established literature, and public data sets to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). For a representative cohort of US adults aged 60 years, ICER of liso-cel was $99 669 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) from a health care sector perspective and $68 212 per QALY from a societal perspective, confirming its cost-effectiveness at the $100 000 per QALY threshold. Nonetheless, under certain scenarios, liso-cel surpasses this benchmark but remains within the US acceptable range of $150 000 per QALY. A key finding underlines the importance of incorporating productivity losses into such analyses to capture the broader societal values of novel therapies. Although these therapies offer substantial clinical benefits, their high acquisition costs and limited long-term data critically challenge their economic sustainability.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of mosunetuzumab for treatment of relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma after two or more lines of systemic therapy in the United States

AIMS

Mosunetuzumab has received accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration for adult patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL) after two or more lines of systemic therapy. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of mosunetuzumab for the treatment of R/R FL from a US private payer perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A partitioned survival model simulated lifetime costs and outcomes of mosunetuzumab against seven comparators: axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), tazemetostat (taz, EZH2 wild-type only), rituximab plus lenalidomide (R-Len) or bendamustine (R-Benda), obinutuzumab plus bendamustine (O-Benda), and a retrospective real-world cohort (RW) based on current patterns of care derived from US electronic health records (Flatiron Health). Efficacy data for mosunetuzumab were from the pivotal Phase II GO29781 trial (NCT02500407). Relative treatment efficacy was estimated from indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs). Costs included were related to treatment, adverse events, routine care, and terminal care. Except for drug costs (March 2023), all costs were inflated to 2022 US dollars. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY.

RESULTS

Mosunetuzumab dominated taz, tisa-cel, and axi-cel with greater QALYs and lower costs. Mosunetuzumab was projected to be cost-effective against R-Benda, O-Benda, and RW with ICERs of $78,607, $42,731, and $21,434, respectively. Mosunetuzumab incurred lower costs but lower QALYs vs. R-Len. NMBs showed that mosunetuzumab was cost-effective against comparators except R-Len.

LIMITATIONS

Without head-to-head comparative data, the model had to rely on ITCs, some of which were affected by residual bias. Model inputs were obtained from multiple sources. Extensive sensitivity analyses assessed the importance of these uncertainties.

CONCLUSION

Mosunetuzumab is estimated to be cost-effective compared with approved regimens except R-Len for the treatment of adults with R/R FL.

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.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of transplant-ineligible relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treatment options-Experience of the efficiency frontier approach

OBJECTIVES

The treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) changed remarkably since the European Medicines Agency-approved chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel], lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel], tisagenlecleucel [tisa-cel]) for the third-line onwards (3+L), and targeted therapies (polatuzumab vedotin-bendamustine-rituximab [pola-BR], tafasitamab-lenalidomide [Tafa-L]) for the second-line (2L) onwards. As associated rising treatment costs represent an economic burden, the cost-effectiveness of transplant-ineligible R/R DLBCL interventions was assessed from a German healthcare payer's perspective, using the efficiency frontier (EF) approach.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed to determine the clinical benefit concerning median overall survival (OS) of bendamustine-rituximab (BR), rituximab-gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (R-GemOx), axi-cel, liso-cel, tisa-cel, pola-BR, and Tafa-L. First-year treatment costs (drug and medical services costs) were calculated. Results were merged on two-dimensional graphs illustrating 2L and 3+L EFs.

RESULTS

Second-line EF is formed by BR (median OS 11.49 months, €23 958) and Tafa-L (45.7, €104 541), 3+L EF is formed by R-GemOx (12.0, €29 080), Tafa-L (15.5, €104 541), and axi-cel (18.69, €308 516). These interventions build the respective cost-effectiveness thresholds for novel interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the EF approach, the currently most cost-effective interventions (based on cost-effectiveness ratios) in the indication of R/R DLBCL were identified to guide international reimbursement decisions.

US cost-effectiveness analysis of polatuzumab vedotin in previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

AIMS

We evaluated the pharmacoeconomic value of polatuzumab vedotin plus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (Pola-R-CHP) in previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) versus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 3-state partitioned survival model was used to estimate life years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and cost impacts of Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP. Analyses utilized mixture-cure survival modelling, assessed a lifetime horizon, discounted all outcomes at 3% per year, and examined both payer and societal perspectives. Progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), drug utilization, treatment duration, adverse reactions, and subsequent treatment inputs were based on data from the POLARIX study (NCT03274492). Costs included drug acquisition/administration, adverse reaction management, routine care, subsequent treatments, end-of-life care, and work productivity.

RESULTS

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP were $70,719/QALY gained and $88,855/QALY gained from societal and payer perspectives, respectively. The $32,824 higher total cost of Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP was largely due to higher drug costs ($122,525 vs $27,694), with cost offsets including subsequent treatment (-$52,765), routine care (-$1,781), end-of-life care (-$383), and work productivity (-$8,418). Pola-R-CHP resulted in an increase of 0.47 LYs and 0.46 QALYs versus R-CHOP. Pola-R-CHP was cost-effective in 60.9% and 58.0% of simulations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY gained from societal and payer perspectives, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

There was uncertainty around the OS extrapolation in the model, and costs were derived from different sources. Recommended prophylactic medications were not included; prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for all patients was assumed to be equal across treatment arms in POLARIX. Work productivity loss was estimated from a general population and was not specific to patients with DLBCL.

CONCLUSION

Pola-R-CHP was projected to be cost-effective versus R-CHOP in previously untreated DLBCL, suggesting that Pola-R-CHP represents good value relative to R-CHOP in this setting.