Literature DB >> 29576265

Cost-effectiveness of Pembrolizumab in Second-line Advanced Bladder Cancer.

Michal Sarfaty1, Peter S Hall2, Kelvin K W Chan3, Kiran Virik4, Moshe Leshno5, Noa Gordon6, Assaf Moore6, Victoria Neiman7, Eli Rosenbaum7, Daniel A Goldstein6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Immune-modulating drugs have recently been introduced to the second-line setting of advanced bladder cancer. Pembrolizumab increases overall survival and is associated with less toxicity compared with chemotherapy in this setting based on the Keynote 045 study. The high cost of immunotherapy necessitates an assessment of its value by considering both efficacy and cost.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for the second-line treatment of advanced bladder cancer from the perspective of payers in multiple countries. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We developed a Markov model to compare the cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab with those of chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of advanced bladder cancer based on the Keynote 045 study. Drug costs were acquired for the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), Canada, and Australia. All costs were converted from local currency to US dollars at the exchange rates in September 2017. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Pembrolizumab generated a gain of 0.36-0.37 QALYs compared with chemotherapy. Our analysis established the following incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in second-line advanced bladder cancer treatment: US $122 557/QALY; UK $91 995/QALY; Canada $90 099/QALY; and Australia $99 966/QALY. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds per QALY are considered to be around 100 000-150 000 US dollars for the US, 20 000-50 000 pounds for the UK (US$25 000-65 000), 20 000-100 000 CAD for Canada (US$16 000-80 000), and 40 000-75 000 AUD for Australia (US$32 000-60 000).
CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness and WTP thresholds vary between countries. Compared with the other countries examined, US drug prices were found to be the highest, leading to the highest ICER. With standard WTP thresholds, pembrolizumab may be considered cost-effective in the US but not in the other countries examined. PATIENT
SUMMARY: This article assessed the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with metastatic bladder cancer who had previously failed one treatment regimen. It would cost $122 557 in the United States, $91 995 in the United Kingdom, $90 099 in Canada, and $99 966 in Australia to gain one quality-adjusted life-year with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in these patients, which may be considered cost-effective only in the United States because of the differences in willingness-to-pay thresholds.
Copyright © 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bladder cancer; Cost-effectiveness; Immunotherapy; Programmed death 1 receptor; Transitional cell carcinoma

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29576265     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.03.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  15 in total

1.  A cost-utility analysis of atezolizumab in the second-line treatment of patients with metastatic bladder cancer.

Authors:  A Parmar; M Richardson; P C Coyte; S Cheng; B Sander; K K W Chan
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  First-line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab vs Sunitinib for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  XiaoMin Wan; YuCong Zhang; ChongQing Tan; XiaoHui Zeng; LiuBao Peng
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 31.777

3.  A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: First-Line Avelumab Plus Axitinib Versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Peiyao Lu; Weiting Liang; Jiahao Li; Yanming Hong; Zhuojia Chen; Tao Liu; Pei Dong; Hongbing Huang; Tiantian Zhang; Jie Jiang
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2020-05-08       Impact factor: 5.810

4.  Regorafenib treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who progressed on sorafenib-A cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Amir Shlomai; Moshe Leshno; Daniel A Goldstein
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

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

Review 6.  Pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: an evidence-based review of place in therapy.

Authors:  Rutika Mehta; Anand Shah; Khaldoun Almhanna
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  High economic burden of immunotherapy underlines the need of predictive biomarkers for the individual therapy algorithm in metastatic bladder cancer.

Authors:  Renate Pichler; Wolfgang Loidl; Martin Pichler
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-12

8.  Comprehensive investigation of T and B cell receptor repertoires in an MC38 tumor model following murine anti‑PD‑1 administration.

Authors:  Lu Zhang; I-Ming Wang; Nicolas Solban; Razvan Cristescu; Gefei Zeng; Brian Long
Journal:  Mol Med Rep       Date:  2020-05-22       Impact factor: 2.952

9.  Development and validation of a novel stem cell subtype for bladder cancer based on stem genomic profiling.

Authors:  Chaozhi Tang; Jiakang Ma; Xiuli Liu; Zhengchun Liu
Journal:  Stem Cell Res Ther       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 6.832

Review 10.  Targeted Molecular Therapeutics for Bladder Cancer-A New Option beyond the Mixed Fortunes of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors?

Authors:  Olga Bednova; Jeffrey V Leyton
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 5.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.