Cost-effectiveness analysis of molecular reflex testing-based targeted therapy in non-small cell lung cancer from a German healthcare payer perspective using a decision tree model.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Leonie Schumacher, Melina Sophie Kurte, Tabea Poos, Markus Thalheimer, Frank Griesinger, Florian Kron
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness analysis of molecular reflex testing-based targeted therapy in non-small cell lung cancer from a German healthcare payer perspective using a decision tree model.","authors":"Leonie Schumacher, Melina Sophie Kurte, Tabea Poos, Markus Thalheimer, Frank Griesinger, Florian Kron","doi":"10.1186/s12962-026-00803-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reflex testing (RT) - pathologist-initiated molecular testing performed at non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosis - enables rapid identification of actionable genomic alterations for targeted therapy (TT) selection. Despite national and international guideline recommendations, approximately 15% of patients with advanced NSCLC in Germany remain untested for driver mutations. The portion of untested patients in early stages is likely to be even higher.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study simulated the clinical and economic impact of introducing RT for untested NSCLC patients under different implementation scenarios, using a decision-tree model from the German statutory health insurance (SHI) perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A decision-tree model simulated four RT cases (C): (C1) no molecular testing, (C2) testing per German S3 guideline recommendations, (C3) testing according to current TT approvals, and (C4) comprehensive panel testing (standard in Austria). PD-L1 expression was tested in all cases. The untested NSCLC population was projected for 2025 based on SHI demographics. Model inputs comprised RT sensitivity, mutation and stage distribution, drug acquisition costs (Lauer-Taxe, April 2025), and median overall/progression-free survival (mOS/mPFS) per therapeutic strategy. A scenario analysis was conducted assuming NGS test costs of €3,000 per panel to assess their potential influence on cost-effectiveness versus no testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All RT cases (C2-C4) substantially increased actionable mutation detection, enabling earlier TT initiation and lower mean treatment costs versus no molecular testing. C2-C4 were clinically dominant, driven by increased mOS by 5.48-5.47 months and mPFS by 4.89-5.42 months. Model yielded annual cost savings versus no testing of €740 (C2) and €535 (C3/C4) per patient (annual cost savings of €1,175 - €1,621 per life-year gained). When €3,000 next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel costs were included, annual costs per patient increased modestly (C2: €2,260; C3/C4: €2,465 versus no testing), at annual incremental costs of €4,946 - €5,409 per life-year gained.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Reflex testing across implementation cases, by enabling earlier identification of actionable biomarkers and receipt of matched targeted therapy, improves clinical outcomes and is cost-effective for untested NSCLC patients from the German SHI perspective. Structured initiatives, such as national Network for Genomic Medicine (nNGM), could further expand equitable access to precision oncology in Germany.</p>","PeriodicalId":47054,"journal":{"name":"Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13397798/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-026-00803-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Reflex testing (RT) - pathologist-initiated molecular testing performed at non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosis - enables rapid identification of actionable genomic alterations for targeted therapy (TT) selection. Despite national and international guideline recommendations, approximately 15% of patients with advanced NSCLC in Germany remain untested for driver mutations. The portion of untested patients in early stages is likely to be even higher.

Objective: This study simulated the clinical and economic impact of introducing RT for untested NSCLC patients under different implementation scenarios, using a decision-tree model from the German statutory health insurance (SHI) perspective.

Methods: A decision-tree model simulated four RT cases (C): (C1) no molecular testing, (C2) testing per German S3 guideline recommendations, (C3) testing according to current TT approvals, and (C4) comprehensive panel testing (standard in Austria). PD-L1 expression was tested in all cases. The untested NSCLC population was projected for 2025 based on SHI demographics. Model inputs comprised RT sensitivity, mutation and stage distribution, drug acquisition costs (Lauer-Taxe, April 2025), and median overall/progression-free survival (mOS/mPFS) per therapeutic strategy. A scenario analysis was conducted assuming NGS test costs of €3,000 per panel to assess their potential influence on cost-effectiveness versus no testing.

Results: All RT cases (C2-C4) substantially increased actionable mutation detection, enabling earlier TT initiation and lower mean treatment costs versus no molecular testing. C2-C4 were clinically dominant, driven by increased mOS by 5.48-5.47 months and mPFS by 4.89-5.42 months. Model yielded annual cost savings versus no testing of €740 (C2) and €535 (C3/C4) per patient (annual cost savings of €1,175 - €1,621 per life-year gained). When €3,000 next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel costs were included, annual costs per patient increased modestly (C2: €2,260; C3/C4: €2,465 versus no testing), at annual incremental costs of €4,946 - €5,409 per life-year gained.

Conclusions: Reflex testing across implementation cases, by enabling earlier identification of actionable biomarkers and receipt of matched targeted therapy, improves clinical outcomes and is cost-effective for untested NSCLC patients from the German SHI perspective. Structured initiatives, such as national Network for Genomic Medicine (nNGM), could further expand equitable access to precision oncology in Germany.

从德国医疗保健支付者的角度使用决策树模型分析基于分子反射测试的非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗的成本效益。
背景:反射测试(RT)——病理学家发起的非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)诊断的分子测试——能够快速识别可操作的基因组改变,以进行靶向治疗(TT)的选择。尽管有国家和国际指南的推荐,在德国大约15%的晚期NSCLC患者仍未进行驱动突变检测。在早期阶段未接受检测的患者比例可能更高。目的:本研究采用德国法定健康保险(SHI)视角的决策树模型,模拟了在不同实施方案下,对未经检测的非小细胞肺癌患者引入RT的临床和经济影响。方法:采用决策树模型模拟4例RT病例(C):(C1)不进行分子检测,(C2)按照德国S3指南建议进行检测,(C3)按照当前TT批准进行检测,(C4)综合面板检测(奥地利标准)。检测所有病例的PD-L1表达。根据SHI人口统计数据,预计2025年未检测的非小细胞肺癌人口。模型输入包括RT敏感性、突变和分期分布、药物获取成本(lauer - tax, 2025年4月)和每个治疗策略的中位总生存期/无进展生存期(mOS/mPFS)。进行了情景分析,假设每个面板的NGS测试成本为3,000欧元,以评估其对成本效益的潜在影响,而不是不进行测试。结果:所有RT病例(C2-C4)显著增加了可操作的突变检测,与不进行分子检测相比,可以更早地启动TT,降低平均治疗成本。临床以C2-C4为主,mo升高5.48 ~ 5.47个月,mPFS升高4.89 ~ 5.42个月。与不进行测试相比,该模型每年可节省每位患者740欧元(C2)和535欧元(C3/C4)的成本(每个生命年可节省1,175欧元至1,621欧元)。当包括3000欧元的下一代测序(NGS)面板成本时,每位患者的年成本略有增加(C2: 2260欧元;C3/C4: 2465欧元,未进行检测),每个生命年的年增量成本为4,946欧元至5,409欧元。结论:从德国SHI的角度来看,在实施病例中进行反射测试,通过早期识别可操作的生物标志物和接受匹配的靶向治疗,改善了临床结果,并且对未经测试的NSCLC患者具有成本效益。结构化的计划,如国家基因组医学网络(nNGM),可以进一步扩大德国对精确肿瘤学的公平获取。
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
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
59
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that considers manuscripts on all aspects of cost-effectiveness analysis, including conceptual or methodological work, economic evaluations, and policy analysis related to resource allocation at a national or international level. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation is aimed at health economists, health services researchers, and policy-makers with an interest in enhancing the flow and transfer of knowledge relating to efficiency in the health sector. Manuscripts are encouraged from researchers based in low- and middle-income countries, with a view to increasing the international economic evidence base for health.
×
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
小红书