First-Line Camrelizumab Plus Rivoceranib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A China-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Abstract

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma poses a significant public health burden in China, necessitating the economic evaluation of new therapeutic strategies for policy-makers and clinicians. The international, randomized phase 3 trial CARES-310 revealed that camrelizumab plus rivoceranib provided a substantial clinical benefit in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but the economic outcome remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (CARES-310) from the perspective of the Chinese health care system.

Methods: A partitioned survival model was developed to estimate the lifetime cost and clinical outcomes of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Survival data from the CARES-310 trial were used to create a hypothetical cohort of 543 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma for modeling disease progression. The life-year, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to measure the model's outcome, with the willingness-to-pay threshold set at 3 times China's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (US$36 780). Univariate, multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analysis were performed to assess parameter uncertainty, complemented by a scenario analysis using health utilities reported in literature.

Results: The camrelizumab group yielded an additional 0.239 QALYs at an added cost of US$8340 compared with sorafenib, resulting in an ICER of US$34 897/QALY. Univariate sensitivity analysis indicated that the model results were most sensitive to the utility of progression-free survival in the camrelizumab group, sorafenib cost, and camrelizumab cost. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed a 56% probability of cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib among all patients. The results of the subgroup analysis demonstrated camrelizumab plus rivoceranib was the most cost-effective in the subgroup with albumin-bilirubin grade 2.

Conclusions: At a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$36 780/QALY, camrelizumab plus rivoceranib is likely to be a cost-effective option compared with sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China.