Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab combined with chemotherapy as a first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology Pub Date : 2024-12-16 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/17588359241301339
Jingwen Lin, Xiaobing Song, Wu Fu, Caicong You, Na Li, Maobai Liu, Hongfu Cai
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab combined with chemotherapy as a first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.","authors":"Jingwen Lin, Xiaobing Song, Wu Fu, Caicong You, Na Li, Maobai Liu, Hongfu Cai","doi":"10.1177/17588359241301339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Urothelial carcinoma is a significant health concern in the United States (US), with high mortality and economic burdens. The CheckMate-901 trial showed promising survival benefits for nivolumab combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin followed by nivolumab maintenance therapy (nivolumab-combination) as first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC), but its cost-effectiveness is unclear.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the nivolumab-combination versus standard chemotherapy (gemcitabine-cisplatin) for advanced UC from the perspective of healthcare payers in the US.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A model-based pharmacoeconomic evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on the CheckMate-901 study, a three-state Markov model (progression-free, progression, and death) was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab-combination versus gemcitabine-cisplatin as a first-line treatment for unresectable or metastatic UC. The model's outputs included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs and were used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Costs included drug prices, adverse event management, and healthcare resource utilization from a US healthcare payer's perspective. State utilities were derived from published literature. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were used to test model robustness. Scenario analyses for drug costs in the UK and Australian health systems were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with gemcitabine-cisplatin, the nivolumab-combination resulted in an additional 0.416 QALYs at an incremental cost of $90,523, yielding an ICER of $217,527 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses indicated significant impacts from the cost of nivolumab maintenance therapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with gemcitabine-cisplatin, nivolumab-combination therapy is not cost-effective for unresectable or metastatic UC at a $100,000 per QALY threshold. High drug prices in the US significantly impact cost-effectiveness, highlighting the need for price negotiations and healthcare policy adjustments to balance innovation incentives and patient affordability.</p>","PeriodicalId":23053,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology","volume":"16 ","pages":"17588359241301339"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11650468/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17588359241301339","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Urothelial carcinoma is a significant health concern in the United States (US), with high mortality and economic burdens. The CheckMate-901 trial showed promising survival benefits for nivolumab combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin followed by nivolumab maintenance therapy (nivolumab-combination) as first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC), but its cost-effectiveness is unclear.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the nivolumab-combination versus standard chemotherapy (gemcitabine-cisplatin) for advanced UC from the perspective of healthcare payers in the US.

Design: A model-based pharmacoeconomic evaluation.

Methods: Based on the CheckMate-901 study, a three-state Markov model (progression-free, progression, and death) was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab-combination versus gemcitabine-cisplatin as a first-line treatment for unresectable or metastatic UC. The model's outputs included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs and were used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Costs included drug prices, adverse event management, and healthcare resource utilization from a US healthcare payer's perspective. State utilities were derived from published literature. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were used to test model robustness. Scenario analyses for drug costs in the UK and Australian health systems were performed.

Results: Compared with gemcitabine-cisplatin, the nivolumab-combination resulted in an additional 0.416 QALYs at an incremental cost of $90,523, yielding an ICER of $217,527 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses indicated significant impacts from the cost of nivolumab maintenance therapy.

Conclusion: Compared with gemcitabine-cisplatin, nivolumab-combination therapy is not cost-effective for unresectable or metastatic UC at a $100,000 per QALY threshold. High drug prices in the US significantly impact cost-effectiveness, highlighting the need for price negotiations and healthcare policy adjustments to balance innovation incentives and patient affordability.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
纳武单抗联合化疗作为一线治疗不可切除或转移性尿路上皮癌患者的成本效益。
背景:尿路上皮癌在美国是一个重要的健康问题,具有高死亡率和经济负担。CheckMate-901试验显示,作为不可切除或转移性尿路上皮癌(UC)的一线治疗,纳武单抗联合吉西他滨和顺铂有希望提高生存期,随后进行纳武单抗维持治疗(纳武单抗联合),但其成本效益尚不清楚。目的:本研究旨在从美国医疗保健支付者的角度评估尼武单抗联合化疗与标准化疗(吉西他滨-顺铂)治疗晚期UC的成本效益。设计:基于模型的药物经济学评价。方法:基于CheckMate-901研究,建立了一个三状态Markov模型(无进展、进展和死亡)来评估尼武单抗联合与吉西他滨-顺铂作为一线治疗不可切除或转移性UC的成本-效果。该模型的输出包括质量调整寿命年(QALYs)和成本,并用于计算增量成本-效果比(ICER)。从美国医疗支付者的角度来看,成本包括药品价格、不良事件管理和医疗资源利用。国家公用事业来源于出版的文献。采用单向敏感性分析和概率敏感性分析检验模型的稳健性。对英国和澳大利亚卫生系统的药品成本进行了情景分析。结果:与吉西他滨-顺铂相比,尼沃单抗联合治疗的QALY增加了0.416个,增量成本为90,523美元,每个QALY的ICER为217,527美元。敏感性分析显示纳武单抗维持治疗的成本有显著影响。结论:与吉西他滨-顺铂相比,尼伏单抗联合治疗对于不可切除或转移性UC的成本效益不高,每QALY阈值为10万美元。美国的高药价严重影响了成本效益,凸显了价格谈判和医疗保健政策调整的必要性,以平衡创新激励和患者负担能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
2.00%
发文量
160
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal delivering the highest quality articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies in the medical treatment of cancer. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in medical oncology, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
期刊最新文献
Spleen volume change as a prognostic and immunologic imaging biomarker in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer receiving chemo-immunotherapy. Immunotherapy advances in pleural mesothelioma. Impact of relative dose intensity of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with thymic epithelial tumors: a retrospective study. The role of thoracic radiotherapy in the setting of immunotherapy in polymetastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multi-center cohort study. TensorFlow-based MobileNetV2 U-Net tumor segmentation and multiparametric MRI radiomics for predicting cervical lymph node metastasis in oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1