Lorlatinib治疗西班牙成人间变性淋巴瘤激酶阳性晚期非小细胞肺癌的成本-效果

IF 2.2 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CEOR.S415711
María Presa, David Vicente, Antonio Calles, Laura Salinas-Ortega, Jaesh Naik, Luis F García, Javier Soto
{"title":"Lorlatinib治疗西班牙成人间变性淋巴瘤激酶阳性晚期非小细胞肺癌的成本-效果","authors":"María Presa,&nbsp;David Vicente,&nbsp;Antonio Calles,&nbsp;Laura Salinas-Ortega,&nbsp;Jaesh Naik,&nbsp;Luis F García,&nbsp;Javier Soto","doi":"10.2147/CEOR.S415711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficiency of lorlatinib compared to alectinib and brigatinib for the treatment of adult patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously not treated, in Spain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A partitioned survival model comprised progression free, non-intracranial progression, intracranial progression, and death health states was constructed to estimate the total costs, life-years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) accumulated in a lifetime horizon. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for lorlatinib were obtained from the CROWN study. For alectinib and brigatinib, a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted to estimate OS and PFS hazard ratios versus crizotinib. Utilities were estimated based on EQ-5D-5L data derived from the CROWN (lorlatinib), ALEX (alectinib) and ALTA-1L (brigatinib) studies. According to the Spanish National Health Service perspective the total costs (expressed in euros using a 2021 cost year) included drug acquisition and the administration's subsequent treatment, ALK+ advanced NSCLC management and adverse-event management, and palliative care. Unitary costs were obtained from local cost databases and literature. Costs, LYGs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to test the model's robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Lorlatinib provided higher health outcomes (+0.70 LYG/patient, +1.42 QALYs/patient) and lower costs (-€9239/patient) than alectinib. Lorlatinib yielded higher LYG (+1.74) and QALYs (+2.30) versus brigatinib but higher costs/patient (+€36,627), resulting in an incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio of €15,912/QALY gained.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study suggest that lorlatinib may be a dominant treatment option versus alectinib. Considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of €25,000/QALY, lorlatinib may be an efficient option compared to brigatinib.</p>","PeriodicalId":47313,"journal":{"name":"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research","volume":"15 ","pages":"659-671"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/af/22/ceor-15-659.PMC10494862.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness of Lorlatinib for the Treatment of Adult Patients with Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase Positive Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Spain.\",\"authors\":\"María Presa,&nbsp;David Vicente,&nbsp;Antonio Calles,&nbsp;Laura Salinas-Ortega,&nbsp;Jaesh Naik,&nbsp;Luis F García,&nbsp;Javier Soto\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/CEOR.S415711\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficiency of lorlatinib compared to alectinib and brigatinib for the treatment of adult patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously not treated, in Spain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A partitioned survival model comprised progression free, non-intracranial progression, intracranial progression, and death health states was constructed to estimate the total costs, life-years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) accumulated in a lifetime horizon. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for lorlatinib were obtained from the CROWN study. For alectinib and brigatinib, a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted to estimate OS and PFS hazard ratios versus crizotinib. Utilities were estimated based on EQ-5D-5L data derived from the CROWN (lorlatinib), ALEX (alectinib) and ALTA-1L (brigatinib) studies. According to the Spanish National Health Service perspective the total costs (expressed in euros using a 2021 cost year) included drug acquisition and the administration's subsequent treatment, ALK+ advanced NSCLC management and adverse-event management, and palliative care. Unitary costs were obtained from local cost databases and literature. Costs, LYGs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to test the model's robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Lorlatinib provided higher health outcomes (+0.70 LYG/patient, +1.42 QALYs/patient) and lower costs (-€9239/patient) than alectinib. Lorlatinib yielded higher LYG (+1.74) and QALYs (+2.30) versus brigatinib but higher costs/patient (+€36,627), resulting in an incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio of €15,912/QALY gained.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study suggest that lorlatinib may be a dominant treatment option versus alectinib. Considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of €25,000/QALY, lorlatinib may be an efficient option compared to brigatinib.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"659-671\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/af/22/ceor-15-659.PMC10494862.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S415711\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S415711","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估lorlatinib与alectinib和brigatinib在西班牙治疗未治疗的间变性淋巴瘤激酶(ALK)阳性晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)成人患者中的疗效。方法:构建由无进展、非颅内进展、颅内进展和死亡健康状态组成的分区生存模型,估计总成本、生命周期内获得的生命年(LYG)和质量调整生命年(QALYs)。lorlatinib的总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)来自CROWN研究。对于阿勒替尼和布加替尼,进行了随机对照试验的网络荟萃分析,以估计OS和PFS与克唑替尼的风险比。效用是根据来自CROWN (lorlatinib)、ALEX (alectinib)和ALTA-1L (brigatinib)研究的EQ-5D-5L数据进行估计的。根据西班牙国家卫生服务的观点,总成本(以欧元表示,使用2021成本年)包括药物采购和管理层的后续治疗,ALK+高级NSCLC管理和不良事件管理,以及姑息治疗。单一成本是从当地成本数据库和文献中获得的。成本、盈利率和质量年折扣率为每年3%。采用确定性和概率敏感性分析来检验模型的稳健性。结果:与阿勒替尼相比,Lorlatinib提供了更高的健康结果(+0.70 LYG/患者,+1.42 QALYs/患者)和更低的成本(- 9239欧元/患者)。与布加替尼相比,Lorlatinib产生更高的LYG(+1.74)和QALY(+2.30),但更高的成本/患者(+ 36,627欧元),导致增量成本-效益比为15,912欧元/QALY。结论:本研究结果表明,与阿勒替尼相比,氯拉替尼可能是一种主要的治疗选择。考虑到2.5万欧元/QALY的支付意愿门槛,与布加替尼相比,lorlatinib可能是一个有效的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Cost-Effectiveness of Lorlatinib for the Treatment of Adult Patients with Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase Positive Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Spain.

Purpose: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficiency of lorlatinib compared to alectinib and brigatinib for the treatment of adult patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously not treated, in Spain.

Methods: A partitioned survival model comprised progression free, non-intracranial progression, intracranial progression, and death health states was constructed to estimate the total costs, life-years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) accumulated in a lifetime horizon. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for lorlatinib were obtained from the CROWN study. For alectinib and brigatinib, a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted to estimate OS and PFS hazard ratios versus crizotinib. Utilities were estimated based on EQ-5D-5L data derived from the CROWN (lorlatinib), ALEX (alectinib) and ALTA-1L (brigatinib) studies. According to the Spanish National Health Service perspective the total costs (expressed in euros using a 2021 cost year) included drug acquisition and the administration's subsequent treatment, ALK+ advanced NSCLC management and adverse-event management, and palliative care. Unitary costs were obtained from local cost databases and literature. Costs, LYGs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to test the model's robustness.

Results: Lorlatinib provided higher health outcomes (+0.70 LYG/patient, +1.42 QALYs/patient) and lower costs (-€9239/patient) than alectinib. Lorlatinib yielded higher LYG (+1.74) and QALYs (+2.30) versus brigatinib but higher costs/patient (+€36,627), resulting in an incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio of €15,912/QALY gained.

Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that lorlatinib may be a dominant treatment option versus alectinib. Considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of €25,000/QALY, lorlatinib may be an efficient option compared to brigatinib.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
83
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Real-World Treatment Patterns in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis Initiating Ruxolitinib Cream: A 12-Month Follow-Up Analysis of a US Payer Claims Database. Cost-Effectiveness of Bivalent Prefusion F Vaccine for Prevention of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Among Older Adults in Italy. Economic Burden of COVID-19 Hospitalization in Almaty, Kazakhstan. A Cost Analysis of Adverse Event Management of Systemic Therapies for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer on Patients with at Least Two Previous Lines of Treatment in Spain. Cost Minimization and Cost Comparison of the Use of Conventional Double Lumen Tube versus Single-Use VivaSight-Double Lumen Tube in Thoracic Surgery: The Pascale Institute Experience.
×
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