Time to Treatment Discontinuation and Cost Effectiveness of Third-Line Therapies in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Real-World Evidence from the NIH All of Us Research Program.
Patrick J Kiel, Mark W McGiffin, Todd C Skaar, Michael A Preston
{"title":"Time to Treatment Discontinuation and Cost Effectiveness of Third-Line Therapies in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Real-World Evidence from the NIH All of Us Research Program.","authors":"Patrick J Kiel, Mark W McGiffin, Todd C Skaar, Michael A Preston","doi":"10.1007/s40801-026-00539-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Treatment options for patients with advanced colorectal cancer who progress after standard therapies remain limited, and real-world evidence on treatment durability and economic outcomes in later lines of therapy is needed to inform clinical and policy decision making. This study evaluated real-world outcomes, healthcare utilization, and cost effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) compared with regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil (Rego/Tri) in third-line (3L) advanced colorectal cancer (CRC), leveraging the nationally distributed NIH All of Us Research Program.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort cost-utility analysis using All of Us Version 8 Curated Data Repository. Eligible adults (≥ 18 years) with advanced CRC initiated ICI (pembrolizumab, nivolumab ± ipilimumab) or Rego/Tri during 2017-2023. Outcomes included time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), healthcare utilization, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs; base-case utility = 0.75). Costs were estimated from CMS 2023 schedules (Part B ASP for infused agents, Part D unit costs for orals; inpatient/outpatient fee schedules for non-drug services), applied per cycle and proportionally for partial cycles. Analyses were conducted from the US Medicare payer perspective, with the time horizon limited to observed TTD and no discounting applied (< 1 year). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), incremental net monetary benefit (INMB), and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) were estimated using nonparametric bootstrapping (1000 replicates). Sensitivity analyses varied utility weights (0.6-1.0).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 82 patients (ICI n = 50; Rego/Tri n = 32), median TTD was significantly longer with ICI (8.0 vs 1.4 months; HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30-0.79; p = 0.0037). Non-drug utilization costs were not significantly different, but ICI drug costs were higher (US$207,558 vs US$119,805; p = 0.001). Mean total costs were US$476,729 for ICI versus US$264,225 for Rego/Tri (p = 0.018). QALYs were higher for ICI (0.84 vs 0.43; p < 0.001). The ICER was US$518,000 per QALY gained. CEAC analysis demonstrated ~ 0% probability of cost effectiveness at US$150,000/QALY, ~ 50% at US$500,000/QALY, and ~ 80% at ≥ US$1,000,000/QALY. Sensitivity analyses yielded consistent findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this exploratory analysis using the novel NIH All of Us Research Program, ICI therapy was associated with longer treatment duration and greater QALYs but substantially higher costs compared with Rego/Tri. ICI was unlikely to be cost effective at conventional US thresholds but may be favorable at higher willingness-to-pay values. These findings highlight both the promise of leveraging the All of Us Research Program for nationally distributed, demographically diverse pharmacoeconomic research and the challenges of interpreting real-world cost effectiveness in small cohorts. As the dataset matures and sample sizes increase, broader application of All of Us may provide valuable insights to inform precision oncology policy and value-based pricing strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":11282,"journal":{"name":"Drugs - Real World Outcomes","volume":" ","pages":"121-131"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13003027/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs - Real World Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-026-00539-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Treatment options for patients with advanced colorectal cancer who progress after standard therapies remain limited, and real-world evidence on treatment durability and economic outcomes in later lines of therapy is needed to inform clinical and policy decision making. This study evaluated real-world outcomes, healthcare utilization, and cost effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) compared with regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil (Rego/Tri) in third-line (3L) advanced colorectal cancer (CRC), leveraging the nationally distributed NIH All of Us Research Program.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort cost-utility analysis using All of Us Version 8 Curated Data Repository. Eligible adults (≥ 18 years) with advanced CRC initiated ICI (pembrolizumab, nivolumab ± ipilimumab) or Rego/Tri during 2017-2023. Outcomes included time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), healthcare utilization, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs; base-case utility = 0.75). Costs were estimated from CMS 2023 schedules (Part B ASP for infused agents, Part D unit costs for orals; inpatient/outpatient fee schedules for non-drug services), applied per cycle and proportionally for partial cycles. Analyses were conducted from the US Medicare payer perspective, with the time horizon limited to observed TTD and no discounting applied (< 1 year). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), incremental net monetary benefit (INMB), and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) were estimated using nonparametric bootstrapping (1000 replicates). Sensitivity analyses varied utility weights (0.6-1.0).
Results: Among 82 patients (ICI n = 50; Rego/Tri n = 32), median TTD was significantly longer with ICI (8.0 vs 1.4 months; HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30-0.79; p = 0.0037). Non-drug utilization costs were not significantly different, but ICI drug costs were higher (US$207,558 vs US$119,805; p = 0.001). Mean total costs were US$476,729 for ICI versus US$264,225 for Rego/Tri (p = 0.018). QALYs were higher for ICI (0.84 vs 0.43; p < 0.001). The ICER was US$518,000 per QALY gained. CEAC analysis demonstrated ~ 0% probability of cost effectiveness at US$150,000/QALY, ~ 50% at US$500,000/QALY, and ~ 80% at ≥ US$1,000,000/QALY. Sensitivity analyses yielded consistent findings.
Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis using the novel NIH All of Us Research Program, ICI therapy was associated with longer treatment duration and greater QALYs but substantially higher costs compared with Rego/Tri. ICI was unlikely to be cost effective at conventional US thresholds but may be favorable at higher willingness-to-pay values. These findings highlight both the promise of leveraging the All of Us Research Program for nationally distributed, demographically diverse pharmacoeconomic research and the challenges of interpreting real-world cost effectiveness in small cohorts. As the dataset matures and sample sizes increase, broader application of All of Us may provide valuable insights to inform precision oncology policy and value-based pricing strategies.
背景:在标准治疗后进展的晚期结直肠癌患者的治疗选择仍然有限,需要关于治疗持久性和后期治疗的经济结果的真实证据来为临床和政策决策提供信息。本研究评估了免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)与瑞非尼或trifluridine/tipiracil (Rego/Tri)在三线(3L)晚期结直肠癌(CRC)治疗中的实际结果、医疗保健利用和成本效益,利用全国分布的NIH All of Us研究计划。方法:我们使用All of Us Version 8策划数据存储库进行回顾性队列成本效用分析。2017-2023年期间,患有晚期CRC的合格成人(≥18岁)启动ICI (pembrolizumab, nivolumab±ipilimumab)或Rego/Tri。结果包括治疗停止时间(TTD)、医疗保健利用率、成本和质量调整生命年(QALYs;基本病例效用= 0.75)。成本估算来自CMS 2023时间表(B部分注射药物的ASP, D部分口服的单位成本;非药物服务的住院/门诊费用时间表),按周期和部分周期按比例应用。从美国医疗保险支付者的角度进行分析,时间范围限于观察到的TTD,不应用折扣(结果:82例患者(ICI n = 50; Rego/Tri n = 32), ICI的中位TTD显着延长(8.0 vs 1.4个月;HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30-0.79; p = 0.0037)。非药物利用成本差异不显著,但ICI药物成本较高(207,558美元vs 119,805美元;p = 0.001)。ICI的平均总成本为476,729美元,而Rego/Tri为264,225美元(p = 0.018)。ICI的QALYs更高(0.84 vs 0.43; p)结论:在这项使用NIH All of Us研究计划的探索性分析中,与Rego/Tri相比,ICI治疗与更长的治疗时间和更高的QALYs相关,但成本明显更高。在传统的美国门槛下,ICI不太可能具有成本效益,但在更高的支付意愿值下,它可能是有利的。这些发现强调了利用“我们所有人研究计划”进行全国分布的、人口统计学上多样化的药物经济学研究的希望,以及在小群体中解释现实世界成本效益的挑战。随着数据集的成熟和样本量的增加,All of Us的更广泛应用可能为精确肿瘤学政策和基于价值的定价策略提供有价值的见解。
期刊介绍:
Drugs - Real World Outcomes targets original research and definitive reviews regarding the use of real-world data to evaluate health outcomes and inform healthcare decision-making on drugs, devices and other interventions in clinical practice. The journal includes, but is not limited to, the following research areas: Using registries/databases/health records and other non-selected observational datasets to investigate: drug use and treatment outcomes prescription patterns drug safety signals adherence to treatment guidelines benefit : risk profiles comparative effectiveness economic analyses including cost-of-illness Data-driven research methodologies, including the capture, curation, search, sharing, analysis and interpretation of ‘big data’ Techniques and approaches to optimise real-world modelling.