Cost-effectiveness analysis of sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer based on JCOG0605 trial

Cost-effectiveness of adding serplulimab to first-line chemotherapy for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer in China

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of serplulimab plus chemotherapy compared chemotherapy alone as first-line strategy for patients with ES-SCLC in China.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model that based on the Chinese health-care system perspective was conducted to evaluate the economic benefits for the two competing first-line treatment. The clinical survival and safety data were obtained from the ASTRUM-005 trial, cost and utility values were gathered from the local charges and previously published study. Both cost and utility values were discounted at an annual rate of 5%. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the model results.

RESULTS

Serplulimab plus chemotherapy could bring additional 0.25 QALYs with the marginal cost of $37,569.32, resulting in an ICER of $147,908.74 per additional QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses confirmed that model results were robust. Subgroup analyses revealed that adding serplulimab to first-line chemotherapy were unlikely to be the cost-effective option for all subgroup patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Serplulimab plus chemotherapy was unlikely to be the cost-effective first-line strategy compared with chemotherapy alone for patients with ES-SCLC in China. Reduced the price of serplulimab could increase its cost-effective.

First-Line Treatments for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Plus Chemotherapy: A Network Meta-Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) plus chemotherapy were unlikely to be considered cost-effective compared with chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in China due to its high costs. However, the cost-effectiveness of the comparison between the regimens of ICIs plus chemotherapy were remained unclear yet. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ICIs plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment for ES-SCLC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

Methods

A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to indirect compare the clinical benefits between the ICIs plus chemotherapy regimens. A decision-analytic model was established to evaluate the cost-effectiveness from the Chinese healthcare system, the clinical efficacy and safety data were obtained from the clinical trials and the results of NMA. Cost and utility values were gathered from the local charges and previously studies. Key outputs of the NMA were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the robustness of the model outcomes.

Results

Five clinical trials (IMpower133, CASPIAN, KEYNOTE-604, CA184-156, and EA5161) of 1,255 patients received first-line ICIs plus chemotherapy strategies were analyzed in the NMA. NMA showed that nivolumab plus chemotherapy was ranked higher than other strategies. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy achieved relatively higher health benefits and lower costs. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that the cost of ICIs had the substantial impact on model outcomes. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that the probability of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy could be considered cost-effective was more than 50% at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $31,313/QALY in China. In scenario analyses, when the price of nivolumab reduced 80%, the probability of nivolumab plus chemotherapy being cost-effective was more than 50%.

Conclusions

The NMA and cost-effectiveness revealed that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy is the most favorable first-line treatment for previously untreated ES-SCLC patients compared other ICIs plus chemotherapy regimens in China. The price reduction of nivolumab would make nivolumab plus chemotherapy be the most cost-effective option in future possible context.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Anlotinib as Third- or Further-Line Treatment for Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) in China

INTRODUCTION

The survival of patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has achieved little progress in the last several decades. ALTER1202 confirmed the efficacy and safety of anlotinib as a third- or further-line option for relapsed SCLC. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of anlotinib compared with placebo as third- or further-line treatment for advanced SCLC in China.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to simulate the process of advanced SCLC and estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of anlotinib versus placebo. The health outcomes and utilities were derived from the ALTER1202 (NCT03059797) and published sources, respectively. Total costs were calculated from the perspective of Chinese society. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted to explore the model uncertainties.

RESULTS

Anlotinib was estimated to result in an additional 0.12 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an incremental cost of $2131.32, resulting in an ICER of $17,741.94/QALY. The ICER did not exceed the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $30,833 per QALY, which was three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of China in 2019. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the cost of anlotinib exerted the maximum influence on the result of the model, followed by the utility of progression-free survival (PFS) state in the anlotinib group and median overall survival (mOS) in the anlotinib group. In PSA, the probability of anlotinib being cost-effective was 26.6% and 78.5% when the WTP threshold was one and three times the GDP per capita, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Anlotinib is likely to be a cost-effective option compared with placebo for patients with relapsed SCLC who experience failure of at least two lines of chemotherapy in China.

Trends in imaging utilization for small cell lung cancer: a decision tree analysis of the NCCN guidelines

PURPOSE

To investigate the differences in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) diagnostic imaging utilization relative to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed SCLC records at our institution between January 1, 2003 and August 1, 2019 (n = 529). Patients were grouped by extensive-stage versus limited-stage and diagnosis date. Clinical, CT, MRI, and nuclear imaging data was collected. Imaging utilization was compared using Student's t-test or Kruskal-Wallis-test/Wilcoxon-Rank-Sums test. Survival was compared using Log-rank-test and Kaplan-Meier-curves.

RESULTS

SCLC patients had a median survival of 290 days. Extensive-stage patients with SCLC demonstrated an increase in emergency imaging utilization when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010 (CT abdomen/pelvis p < 0.001, CTA chest for pulmonary embolism p < 0.01, CT head p < 0.003). Limited-stage patients with SCLC demonstrated an increase in inpatient imaging utilization (CT abdomen/pelvis p < 0.04) and decreased total/outpatient imaging utilization (CT chest-abdomen-pelvis p < 0.05, CT head p < 0.003) when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010. All patients with SCLC had decreased average number of bone-scan studies when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010 (Extensive-stage p < 0.006, Limited-stage p < 0.0006).

CONCLUSION

Imaging utilization trends in the management of patients with SCLC at our institution differed between 2003 and 2010 and 2011-2019 reflecting the changes in the NCCN guidelines.

First-line atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in treatment of extensive small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis from China

BACKGROUND

IMpower 133 trial first confirmed the efficacy and safety of adding atezolizumab or placebo to first-line treatment with chemotherapy in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). While, overprice limited its broad use in clinical. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in treatment of extensive SCLC as first line in China.

METHODS

A Markov model was established by extracting data from the IMpower 133 trial with untreated extensive SCLC patients. Utility values were obtained from published studies, and the costs were acquired from real world and literature. Additionally, sensitivity analyses based on a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold were performed to identify the uncertain parameters of Markov model.

RESULTS

Total costs of atezolizumab group were $48,129, while cost of chemotherapy alone was just $12,920 in placebo group. The quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in atezolizumab group was just 0.072 higher than that in placebo group (0.858 QALYs vs. 0.786 QALYs). The cost-effectiveness ratio between atezolizumab combination with chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone was $489,013/QALY in China. The net benefit of placebo group was significantly higher than atezolizumab group. One-way sensitivity analyses highlighted that utilities of the progression-free survival (PFS) and progression disease state in placebo group were the most influential parameter.

CONCLUSIONS

Atezolizumab combination therapy was not more cost-effective than chemotherapy alone at a WTP threshold of $25,929/QALY in China.