Cost-Utility Analysis of Genomic Profiling in Directing Targeted Therapy in Advanced NSCLC in Thailand

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Saowalak Turongkaravee, Surakit Nathisuwan, Thanyanan Baisamut, Jennis Meanwatthana
{"title":"Cost-Utility Analysis of Genomic Profiling in Directing Targeted Therapy in Advanced NSCLC in Thailand","authors":"Saowalak Turongkaravee,&nbsp;Surakit Nathisuwan,&nbsp;Thanyanan Baisamut,&nbsp;Jennis Meanwatthana","doi":"10.1007/s40258-025-00950-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Sequential next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing has demonstrated cost-effectiveness in guiding targeted therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) in developed countries. However, its cost-effectiveness in developing countries remains uncertain.</p><h3>Objective</h3><p>The aim was to conduct a cost-utility analysis comparing sequential NGS testing with the current approach of single epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) testing combined with first-line targeted therapy, as implemented under Thailand's Universal Health Coverage scheme for aNSCLC.</p><h3>Method</h3><p>Hybrid decision tree and Markov models were developed to estimate the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with each strategy. The models simulate cohorts of aNSCLC patients who receive platinum-based chemotherapy or TKIs based on identified gene alterations. Patients enter the model at 60 years of age. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was computed from a societal perspective. The analysis employed a lifetime horizon and discounted costs and outcomes at a rate of 3%. Furthermore, uncertainty and scenario analyses were conducted.</p><h3>Findings</h3><p>A sequential NGS testing strategy could identify an additional 19% of patients with biomarker-positive findings who subsequently received biomarker-driven targeted therapy compared to a single EGFR testing strategy. The number needed to screen to identify a single gene mutation and administer first-line TKI was six for the sequential NGS testing strategy. Compared to the single EGFR testing, the ICER of the sequential NGS testing strategy was 1,851,150 THB/QALY (US$51,335). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 160,000 THB/QALY (US$4437), the single EGFR testing strategy demonstrated 100% cost-effectiveness. In contrast, the sequential NGS testing was not deemed cost-effective. The sensitivity of the ICER was influenced by the overall survival rates associated with anaplastic lymphoma kinase<b> (</b>ALK) inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy.</p><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Sequential NGS testing identified a greater number of patients with aNSCLC eligible for targeted therapies, resulting in improved survival rates and enhanced QALYs compared to single EGFR testing. However, in the context of Thailand, sequential NGS testing was not cost-effective. The single EGFR testing strategy emerged as the most cost-effective option for guiding first-line targeted therapy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":"23 3","pages":"479 - 491"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40258-025-00950-3.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-025-00950-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Sequential next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing has demonstrated cost-effectiveness in guiding targeted therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) in developed countries. However, its cost-effectiveness in developing countries remains uncertain.

Objective

The aim was to conduct a cost-utility analysis comparing sequential NGS testing with the current approach of single epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) testing combined with first-line targeted therapy, as implemented under Thailand's Universal Health Coverage scheme for aNSCLC.

Method

Hybrid decision tree and Markov models were developed to estimate the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with each strategy. The models simulate cohorts of aNSCLC patients who receive platinum-based chemotherapy or TKIs based on identified gene alterations. Patients enter the model at 60 years of age. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was computed from a societal perspective. The analysis employed a lifetime horizon and discounted costs and outcomes at a rate of 3%. Furthermore, uncertainty and scenario analyses were conducted.

Findings

A sequential NGS testing strategy could identify an additional 19% of patients with biomarker-positive findings who subsequently received biomarker-driven targeted therapy compared to a single EGFR testing strategy. The number needed to screen to identify a single gene mutation and administer first-line TKI was six for the sequential NGS testing strategy. Compared to the single EGFR testing, the ICER of the sequential NGS testing strategy was 1,851,150 THB/QALY (US$51,335). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 160,000 THB/QALY (US$4437), the single EGFR testing strategy demonstrated 100% cost-effectiveness. In contrast, the sequential NGS testing was not deemed cost-effective. The sensitivity of the ICER was influenced by the overall survival rates associated with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy.

Interpretation

Sequential NGS testing identified a greater number of patients with aNSCLC eligible for targeted therapies, resulting in improved survival rates and enhanced QALYs compared to single EGFR testing. However, in the context of Thailand, sequential NGS testing was not cost-effective. The single EGFR testing strategy emerged as the most cost-effective option for guiding first-line targeted therapy.

基因组谱在泰国指导晚期NSCLC靶向治疗中的成本-效用分析。
背景:在发达国家,连续下一代测序(NGS)测试已经证明了在指导使用酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(TKIs)治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(aNSCLC)的靶向治疗方面的成本效益。然而,其在发展中国家的成本效益仍然不确定。目的:目的是进行成本-效用分析,比较序贯NGS检测与目前的单表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)检测结合一线靶向治疗的方法,后者是在泰国的aNSCLC全民健康覆盖计划下实施的。方法:采用混合决策树和马尔可夫模型来估计与每种策略相关的生命周期成本和质量调整寿命年(QALYs)。该模型模拟了基于已鉴定基因改变接受铂类化疗或TKIs的aNSCLC患者队列。患者在60岁时进入模型。增量成本效益比(ICER)是从社会角度计算的。该分析采用了生命周期,并以3%的比率贴现成本和结果。此外,还进行了不确定性和情景分析。研究结果:与单一EGFR检测策略相比,序列NGS检测策略可以额外识别出19%的生物标志物阳性患者,这些患者随后接受了生物标志物驱动的靶向治疗。序列NGS检测策略需要筛选确定单个基因突变并给予一线TKI的数量为6。与单一EGFR检测相比,序列NGS检测策略的ICER为1,851,150 THB/QALY(51,335美元)。在16万THB/QALY(4437美元)的支付意愿阈值下,单一EGFR检测策略显示出100%的成本效益。相比之下,连续的NGS测试被认为不具有成本效益。ICER的敏感性受间变性淋巴瘤激酶(ALK)抑制剂和铂基化疗相关的总生存率的影响。解释:与单一EGFR检测相比,序贯NGS检测确定了更多适合靶向治疗的aNSCLC患者,从而提高了生存率和QALYs。然而,在泰国的情况下,连续的NGS测试并不具有成本效益。单一EGFR检测策略成为指导一线靶向治疗的最具成本效益的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信