Yitian Lang1,2, Deshi Dong3,4, Bin Wu5. 1. Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China. 2. College of Pharmacy, Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China. 3. Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China. dongdeshi@dmu.edu.cn. 4. College of Pharmacy, Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China. dongdeshi@dmu.edu.cn. 5. Medical Decision and Economic Group, Department of Pharmacy, Renji Hospital Affiliated with the School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China. scilwsjtu-wb@yahoo.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The KEYNOTE-048 clinical trial revealed that pembrolizumab improved the overall survival time of patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) vs cetuximab plus chemotherapy (EXTREME regimen). The current study examined the cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy compared with the EXTREME regimen in patients with HNSCC from the perspectives of USA and China. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was implemented for patients with R/M HNSCC, and the cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy compared with the EXTREME regimen was compared. Survival information was derived from the KEYNOTE-048 trial. The model was designed as a 20-year time horizon, a 3-week cycle, and a 3% discount rate for costs and utilities. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) value less than $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was considered cost effective in the USA and $27,538/QALY in China. We analyzed the uncertainty by performing one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: From the base-case analysis, we found that the pembrolizumab monotherapy scheme had a lower cost and better efficacy compared with the EXTREME regimen in the USA. In China, the ICER of the comparison was $62,401/QALY. The ICER of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy vs the EXTREME regimen was $66,630/QALY in the USA and $90,538/QALY in China. CONCLUSIONS: The observations suggested that treatment with pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy is a cost-effective strategy for patients with R/M HNSCC in the USA. However, the conclusion is the opposite for China: the EXTREME regimen is still a cost-effective choice.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The KEYNOTE-048 clinical trial revealed that pembrolizumab improved the overall survival time of patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) vs cetuximab plus chemotherapy (EXTREME regimen). The current study examined the cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy compared with the EXTREME regimen in patients with HNSCC from the perspectives of USA and China. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was implemented for patients with R/M HNSCC, and the cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy compared with the EXTREME regimen was compared. Survival information was derived from the KEYNOTE-048 trial. The model was designed as a 20-year time horizon, a 3-week cycle, and a 3% discount rate for costs and utilities. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) value less than $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was considered cost effective in the USA and $27,538/QALY in China. We analyzed the uncertainty by performing one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: From the base-case analysis, we found that the pembrolizumab monotherapy scheme had a lower cost and better efficacy compared with the EXTREME regimen in the USA. In China, the ICER of the comparison was $62,401/QALY. The ICER of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy vs the EXTREME regimen was $66,630/QALY in the USA and $90,538/QALY in China. CONCLUSIONS: The observations suggested that treatment with pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy is a cost-effective strategy for patients with R/M HNSCC in the USA. However, the conclusion is the opposite for China: the EXTREME regimen is still a cost-effective choice.
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
Authors: Matthew C Ward; Chirag Shah; David J Adelstein; Jessica L Geiger; Jacob A Miller; Shlomo A Koyfman; Mendel E Singer Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2017-09-23 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Barbara Burtness; Kevin J Harrington; Richard Greil; Denis Soulières; Makoto Tahara; Gilberto de Castro; Amanda Psyrri; Neus Basté; Prakash Neupane; Åse Bratland; Thorsten Fuereder; Brett G M Hughes; Ricard Mesía; Nuttapong Ngamphaiboon; Tamara Rordorf; Wan Zamaniah Wan Ishak; Ruey-Long Hong; René González Mendoza; Ananya Roy; Yayan Zhang; Burak Gumuscu; Jonathan D Cheng; Fan Jin; Danny Rischin Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 79.321
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