Cost-effectiveness of first-line enfortumab vedotin in addition to pembrolizumab for metastatic urothelial carcinoma in the United States

IF 5.7 2区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY
Andong Li, Meiyu Wu, Ouyang Xie, Heng Xiang, Kehui Meng, Chongqing Tan, Long Wang, Xiaomin Wan
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of first-line enfortumab vedotin in addition to pembrolizumab for metastatic urothelial carcinoma in the United States","authors":"Andong Li, Meiyu Wu, Ouyang Xie, Heng Xiang, Kehui Meng, Chongqing Tan, Long Wang, Xiaomin Wan","doi":"10.3389/fimmu.2024.1464092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and objectiveThe EV-302 trial found that the combination of enfortumab vedotin (EV) with pembrolizumab significantly improved survival for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, given the high cost of the drugs, there is a need to assess its value by considering both efficacy and cost. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of EV plus pembrolizumab as a first-line treatment for patients with mUC from the perspective of U.S. payers.MethodsA Markov model was developed to compare the lifetime costs and effectiveness of EV in combination with pembrolizumab with chemotherapy in the treatment of mUC patients from U.S. payer perspective. Life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and lifetime costs were estimated. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate model uncertainty. Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed.ResultsCompared to chemotherapy, the combination of EV and pembrolizumab provided an additional 2.10 LYs and 1.72 QALYs, at an incremental cost of $962,240.8 per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is $558,973 per QALY. Subgroup analysis indicated that patients ineligible for cisplatin treatment had a lower ICER compared to those who were eligible for cisplatin.ConclusionsFrom the perspective of US payers, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the combination of EV and pembrolizumab is estimated to not be cost-effective compared to traditional chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of mUC patients.","PeriodicalId":12622,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Immunology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1464092","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectiveThe EV-302 trial found that the combination of enfortumab vedotin (EV) with pembrolizumab significantly improved survival for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, given the high cost of the drugs, there is a need to assess its value by considering both efficacy and cost. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of EV plus pembrolizumab as a first-line treatment for patients with mUC from the perspective of U.S. payers.MethodsA Markov model was developed to compare the lifetime costs and effectiveness of EV in combination with pembrolizumab with chemotherapy in the treatment of mUC patients from U.S. payer perspective. Life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and lifetime costs were estimated. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate model uncertainty. Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed.ResultsCompared to chemotherapy, the combination of EV and pembrolizumab provided an additional 2.10 LYs and 1.72 QALYs, at an incremental cost of $962,240.8 per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is $558,973 per QALY. Subgroup analysis indicated that patients ineligible for cisplatin treatment had a lower ICER compared to those who were eligible for cisplatin.ConclusionsFrom the perspective of US payers, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the combination of EV and pembrolizumab is estimated to not be cost-effective compared to traditional chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of mUC patients.
美国治疗转移性尿路上皮癌的一线恩福单抗韦多汀和彭博利珠单抗的成本效益
背景和目的EV-302试验发现,恩福单抗维多汀(EV)与pembrolizumab联合用药可显著提高转移性尿路上皮癌(mUC)患者的生存率。然而,考虑到药物的高昂成本,有必要通过同时考虑疗效和成本来评估其价值。本研究从美国支付方的角度评估了EV联合pembrolizumab作为mUC患者一线治疗的成本效益。方法建立了一个马尔可夫模型,从美国支付方的角度比较了EV联合pembrolizumab与化疗治疗mUC患者的终生成本和有效性。对生命年(LYs)、质量调整生命年(QALYs)和终生成本进行了估算。进行了单向、双向和概率敏感性分析,以评估模型的不确定性。结果与化疗相比,EV 和 pembrolizumab 联合治疗可增加 2.10 LYs 和 1.72 QALYs,每位患者的增量成本为 962 240.8 美元。每 QALY 的增量成本效益比 (ICER) 为 558,973 美元。亚组分析表明,与符合顺铂治疗条件的患者相比,不符合顺铂治疗条件的患者的 ICER 更低。结论从美国支付方的角度来看,在每 QALY 150,000 美元的支付意愿阈值下,与传统化疗相比,EV 和 pembrolizumab 联合治疗 mUC 患者的一线治疗估计不具有成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
11.00%
发文量
7153
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Immunology is a leading journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across basic, translational and clinical immunology. 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. Frontiers in Immunology is the official Journal of the International Union of Immunological Societies (IUIS). Encompassing the entire field of Immunology, this journal welcomes papers that investigate basic mechanisms of immune system development and function, with a particular emphasis given to the description of the clinical and immunological phenotype of human immune disorders, and on the definition of their molecular basis.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信