The pricing barrier: cost-effectiveness of Glofitamab for relapsed/refractory DLBCL in China beyond threshold and value-based pricing strategy considerations.

IF 3 3区医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy Pub Date : 2026-08-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-25 DOI:10.1080/14737140.2026.2630025

Shen Lin, Xiangzhen Wang, Lijing Yang, Shaohong Luo, Xiaoting Huang, Xiuhua Weng, Xiongwei Xu

{"title":"The pricing barrier: cost-effectiveness of Glofitamab for relapsed/refractory DLBCL in China beyond threshold and value-based pricing strategy considerations.","authors":"Shen Lin, Xiangzhen Wang, Lijing Yang, Shaohong Luo, Xiaoting Huang, Xiuhua Weng, Xiongwei Xu","doi":"10.1080/14737140.2026.2630025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: To assess the cost-effectiveness of Glofitamab plus Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin (Glofit-GemOx) versus Rituximab plus Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin for treating relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) in China.Research design and methods: A partitioned survival model utilized data from the phase 3 STARGLO trial, extrapolating progression-free survival and overall survival via parametric distributions. Costs and utilities were derived from Chinese databases and literature, covering drug expenses, adverse event management, and subsequent therapies. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were assessed against a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $40,343 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Sensitivity and budgetary impact analyses were conducted.Results: Glofit-GemOx yielded an additional 1.47 QALYs (2.64 vs. 1.17) at an incremental cost of $92,765, resulting in an ICER of $63,379/QALY, exceeding the WTP threshold. Key drivers included Glofitamab's price and utility parameters. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed a 14.5% probability of cost-effectiveness at the threshold. A 30% price reduction would be required to achieve cost-effectiveness. The five-year budget impact analysis projected sustained and substantial incremental costs associated with Glofit-GemOx.Conclusions: Although Glofit-GemOx offers significant survival benefits, it is not cost-effective in China at current prices. Price reductions or insurance coverage could improve accessibility, supporting the need for value-based pricing strategies.","PeriodicalId":12099,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1071-1078"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2026.2630025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To assess the cost-effectiveness of Glofitamab plus Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin (Glofit-GemOx) versus Rituximab plus Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin for treating relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) in China.

Research design and methods: A partitioned survival model utilized data from the phase 3 STARGLO trial, extrapolating progression-free survival and overall survival via parametric distributions. Costs and utilities were derived from Chinese databases and literature, covering drug expenses, adverse event management, and subsequent therapies. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were assessed against a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $40,343 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Sensitivity and budgetary impact analyses were conducted.

Results: Glofit-GemOx yielded an additional 1.47 QALYs (2.64 vs. 1.17) at an incremental cost of $92,765, resulting in an ICER of $63,379/QALY, exceeding the WTP threshold. Key drivers included Glofitamab's price and utility parameters. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed a 14.5% probability of cost-effectiveness at the threshold. A 30% price reduction would be required to achieve cost-effectiveness. The five-year budget impact analysis projected sustained and substantial incremental costs associated with Glofit-GemOx.

Conclusions: Although Glofit-GemOx offers significant survival benefits, it is not cost-effective in China at current prices. Price reductions or insurance coverage could improve accessibility, supporting the need for value-based pricing strategies.

查看原文本刊更多论文

定价障碍：格非他抗治疗复发/难治性DLBCL在中国的成本效益超过阈值和基于价值的定价策略考虑。

背景：评估格洛非单抗联合吉西他滨和奥沙利铂（glofitt - gemox）与利妥昔单抗联合吉西他滨和奥沙利铂治疗复发/难治性弥漫性大b细胞淋巴瘤（R/R DLBCL）在中国的成本效益。研究设计和方法：采用STARGLO 3期试验数据的分区生存模型，通过参数分布推断无进展生存期和总生存期。费用和效用来源于中国数据库和文献，包括药物费用、不良事件管理和后续治疗。增量成本效益比（ICERs）是根据每个质量调整生命年（QALY）的支付意愿（WTP）阈值40,343美元进行评估的。进行了敏感性和预算影响分析。结果：Glofit-GemOx产生额外的1.47个QALY (2.64 vs. 1.17)，增量成本为92,765美元，导致ICER为63,379美元/QALY，超过WTP阈值。主要驱动因素包括Glofitamab的价格和效用参数。概率敏感性分析显示，在阈值处成本-效果的概率为14.5%。为了达到成本效益，需要降价30%。五年预算影响分析预测了与Glofit-GemOx相关的持续和大量增量成本。结论：虽然Glofit-GemOx提供了显著的生存益处，但以目前的价格在中国并不具有成本效益。降价或保险可以改善可及性，支持基于价值的定价策略的需要。

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

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy 医学-肿瘤学

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

3.00%

发文量

100

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy (ISSN 1473-7140) provides expert appraisal and commentary on the major trends in cancer care and highlights the performance of new therapeutic and diagnostic approaches. Coverage includes tumor management, novel medicines, anticancer agents and chemotherapy, biological therapy, cancer vaccines, therapeutic indications, biomarkers and diagnostics, and treatment guidelines. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review, and the journal makes an essential contribution to decision-making in cancer care. Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Review format and includes the following sections: Expert Opinion - a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.