恩福单抗韦多汀联合pembrolizumab作为晚期尿路上皮癌的一线治疗方案:基于EV-302试验的中国成本效益分析。

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Frontiers in Pharmacology Pub Date : 2024-09-26 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fphar.2024.1412292
Maojin You, Qiaoyan Zheng, Ying He
{"title":"恩福单抗韦多汀联合pembrolizumab作为晚期尿路上皮癌的一线治疗方案:基于EV-302试验的中国成本效益分析。","authors":"Maojin You, Qiaoyan Zheng, Ying He","doi":"10.3389/fphar.2024.1412292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The efficacy and safety of enfortumab vedotin combined with pembrolizumab (EV-PEMB) was investigated as a first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) in a phase III clinical trial (EV-302). The trial findings indicated significant prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to chemotherapy with a favorable safety profile. However, EV-PEMB is costly and it is unknown whether it is cost-effective compared to chemotherapy. This study aimed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of EV-PEMB <i>versus</i> chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for advanced UC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Markov model with three distinct health states was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of EV-PEMB as a first-line treatment for advanced UC <i>versus</i> chemotherapy based on the EV-302 trial. Drug costs were obtained from national tender prices. Other expenses and utility values were sourced from the literature or expert advice. The findings of the study included total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We conducted a one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to ensure the model's robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The EV-PEMB regimen demonstrated a gain of 3.22 QALYs at $375,420.24, compared to the chemotherapy regimen with 1.70 QALYs at $23,369.67. ICER for EV-PEMB compared to chemotherapy was at $232,256.16 per QALY gained. In China, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $38,133 per QALY, EV-PEMB has a 0% probability of being cost-effective as a first-line treatment for advanced UC compared to chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, EV-PEMB is unlikely to be a cost-effective first-line treatment option for advanced UC compared to chemotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":12491,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Pharmacology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11464446/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab as a first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis from China based on the EV-302 trial.\",\"authors\":\"Maojin You, Qiaoyan Zheng, Ying He\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fphar.2024.1412292\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The efficacy and safety of enfortumab vedotin combined with pembrolizumab (EV-PEMB) was investigated as a first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) in a phase III clinical trial (EV-302). The trial findings indicated significant prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to chemotherapy with a favorable safety profile. However, EV-PEMB is costly and it is unknown whether it is cost-effective compared to chemotherapy. This study aimed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of EV-PEMB <i>versus</i> chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for advanced UC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Markov model with three distinct health states was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of EV-PEMB as a first-line treatment for advanced UC <i>versus</i> chemotherapy based on the EV-302 trial. Drug costs were obtained from national tender prices. Other expenses and utility values were sourced from the literature or expert advice. The findings of the study included total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We conducted a one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to ensure the model's robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The EV-PEMB regimen demonstrated a gain of 3.22 QALYs at $375,420.24, compared to the chemotherapy regimen with 1.70 QALYs at $23,369.67. ICER for EV-PEMB compared to chemotherapy was at $232,256.16 per QALY gained. In China, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $38,133 per QALY, EV-PEMB has a 0% probability of being cost-effective as a first-line treatment for advanced UC compared to chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, EV-PEMB is unlikely to be a cost-effective first-line treatment option for advanced UC compared to chemotherapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12491,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Pharmacology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11464446/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2024.1412292\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2024.1412292","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究背景在一项III期临床试验(EV-302)中,研究了恩福单抗维多汀联合pembrolizumab(EV-PEMB)作为晚期尿路上皮癌(UC)一线治疗的有效性和安全性。试验结果表明,与化疗相比,无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)明显延长,且安全性良好。然而,EV-PEMB成本高昂,与化疗相比是否具有成本效益尚不清楚。本研究旨在从中国医疗体系的角度,对EV-PEMB与化疗作为晚期UC一线治疗的成本效益进行分析:方法:基于EV-302试验,建立了具有三种不同健康状态的马尔可夫模型,以评估EV-PEMB作为晚期UC一线治疗与化疗的成本效益。药物成本来自国家招标价格。其他费用和效用值来自文献或专家建议。研究结果包括总成本、质量调整生命年 (QALY) 和增量成本效益比 (ICER)。我们进行了单向敏感性分析和概率敏感性分析,以确保模型的稳健性:EV-PEMB方案以375,420.24美元的价格获得了3.22 QALYs的收益,而化疗方案以23,369.67美元的价格获得了1.70 QALYs的收益。与化疗方案相比,EV-PEMB的ICER为232256.16美元/QALY。在中国,与化疗相比,在每QALY 38,133美元的支付意愿阈值下,EV-PEMB作为晚期UC一线治疗具有成本效益的概率为0%:结论:从中国医疗系统的角度来看,与化疗相比,EV-PEMB作为晚期UC的一线治疗方案不太可能具有成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab as a first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis from China based on the EV-302 trial.

Background: The efficacy and safety of enfortumab vedotin combined with pembrolizumab (EV-PEMB) was investigated as a first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) in a phase III clinical trial (EV-302). The trial findings indicated significant prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to chemotherapy with a favorable safety profile. However, EV-PEMB is costly and it is unknown whether it is cost-effective compared to chemotherapy. This study aimed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of EV-PEMB versus chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for advanced UC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

Methods: A Markov model with three distinct health states was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of EV-PEMB as a first-line treatment for advanced UC versus chemotherapy based on the EV-302 trial. Drug costs were obtained from national tender prices. Other expenses and utility values were sourced from the literature or expert advice. The findings of the study included total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We conducted a one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to ensure the model's robustness.

Results: The EV-PEMB regimen demonstrated a gain of 3.22 QALYs at $375,420.24, compared to the chemotherapy regimen with 1.70 QALYs at $23,369.67. ICER for EV-PEMB compared to chemotherapy was at $232,256.16 per QALY gained. In China, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $38,133 per QALY, EV-PEMB has a 0% probability of being cost-effective as a first-line treatment for advanced UC compared to chemotherapy.

Conclusion: From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, EV-PEMB is unlikely to be a cost-effective first-line treatment option for advanced UC compared to chemotherapy.

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
Frontiers in Pharmacology
Frontiers in Pharmacology PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.90%
发文量
5163
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Pharmacology is a leading journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across disciplines, including basic and clinical pharmacology, medicinal chemistry, pharmacy and toxicology. Field Chief Editor Heike Wulff at UC Davis is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.
期刊最新文献
A case report: deep and durable response to low-dose lenvatinib and tislelizumab in an elderly patient with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Deletion of arrestin-3 does not reduce drug-seeking behavior in a longitudinal paradigm of oral morphine self-administration. Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab as a first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis from China based on the EV-302 trial. Erbin: an important therapeutic target for blocking tumor metastasis. Exploring Copper's role in stroke: progress and treatment approaches.
×
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:481959085
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