Literature DB >> 27987627

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nivolumab Compared with Ipilimumab for the Treatment of BRAF Wild-Type Advanced Melanoma in Australia.

Megan A Bohensky1, Kumar Pasupathi2, Alexandra Gorelik2, Hansoo Kim3, James P Harrison3, Danny Liew2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab versus ipilimumab for the treatment of previously untreated patients with BRAF-advanced melanoma (BRAF-AM) from an Australian health system perspective.
METHODS: A state-transition Markov model was constructed to simulate the progress of Australian patients with BRAF-AM. The model had a 10-year time horizon with outcomes discounted at 5% annually. For the nivolumab group, risks of progression and death were based on those observed in the nivolumab arm of a phase III trial (nivolumab vs. dacarbazine). Progression-free survival and overall survival were extrapolated using parametric survival modeling with a log-logistic distribution. In the absence of head-to-head evidence, overall survival and progression-free survival for ipilimumab were estimated on the basis of an indirect comparison using published data. Costs of managing AM were estimated from a survey of Australian clinicians. The cost of ipilimumab was based on the reimbursement price in Australia. The cost of nivolumab was based on expected reimbursement prices in Australia. Quality-of-life data were obtained within the trial using the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire.
RESULTS: Compared with ipilimumab, nivolumab therapy over 10 years was estimated to yield 1.58 life-years and 1.30 quality-adjusted life-years per person, at a (discounted) net cost of US $39,039 per person. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for nivolumab compared with ipilimumab were US $25,101 per year of life saved and $30,475 per quality-adjusted life-year saved.
CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab is a cost-effective means of preventing downstream mortality and morbidity in patients with AM compared with ipilimumab in the Australian setting.
Copyright © 2016 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cost-effectiveness analysis; immunotherapy; melanoma; oncology

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27987627     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.05.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  9 in total

Review 1.  Current landscape of immunotherapy in the treatment of solid tumours, with future opportunities and challenges.

Authors:  N A Nixon; N Blais; S Ernst; C Kollmannsberger; G Bebb; M Butler; M Smylie; S Verma
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Nivolumab for Treatment of Platinum-Resistant Recurrent or Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck.

Authors:  Kathryn R Tringale; Kate T Carroll; Kaveh Zakeri; Assuntina G Sacco; Linda Barnachea; James D Murphy
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  Cost-Effectiveness of Drug Treatments for Advanced Melanoma: A Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Darío Rubio-Rodríguez; Silvia De Diego Blanco; Maite Pérez; Carlos Rubio-Terrés
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Modeling the economic outcomes of immuno-oncology drugs: alternative model frameworks to capture clinical outcomes.

Authors:  E J Gibson; N Begum; I Koblbauer; G Dranitsaris; D Liew; P McEwan; A A Tahami Monfared; Y Yuan; A Juarez-Garcia; D Tyas; M Lees
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2018-03-08

Review 5.  A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Authors:  Vivek Verma; Tanja Sprave; Waqar Haque; Charles B Simone; Joe Y Chang; James W Welsh; Charles R Thomas
Journal:  J Immunother Cancer       Date:  2018-11-23       Impact factor: 13.751

6.  Healthcare cost comparison analysis of nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab versus nivolumab monotherapy and ipilimumab monotherapy in advanced melanoma.

Authors:  Ravi Potluri; Sandip Ranjan; Hitesh Bhandari; Helen Johnson; Andriy Moshyk; Srividya Kotapati
Journal:  Exp Hematol Oncol       Date:  2019-07-03

7.  Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma.

Authors:  Claire Gorry; Laura McCullagh; Michael Barry
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Cost-effectiveness of ipilimumab versus high-dose interferon as an adjuvant therapy in resected high-risk melanoma.

Authors:  Mia Salans; Patrick Travis Courtney; Anthony Yip; James D Murphy
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2021-08-17       Impact factor: 4.452

9.  Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated in the United States.

Authors:  Charles McCrea; Sukhvinder Johal; Shuo Yang; Justin Doan
Journal:  Exp Hematol Oncol       Date:  2018-02-09
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.