M Zhang1, X Liu2, F Wen1, Q Wu1, K Zhou1, L Bai1, Q Li3. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China; West China Biomedical Big Data Center, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China; West China Biomedical Big Data Center, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. Electronic address: liqiu@scu.edu.cn.
Abstract
AIMS: The EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial showed that cemiplimab significantly prolongs the duration of progression-free survival and overall survival in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with at least 50% programmed cell death receptor ligand-1 (PD-L1) positivity, yet the financial burden may limit its use. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab versus chemotherapy in a US setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model, with three mutually exclusive health states, was used to compare the expected health outcomes and cost of cemiplimab with chemotherapy. Survival data and transition probabilities were collected from the EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial. Utility values and costs are publicly available from open sources. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted in both the whole population and subgroups to test the robustness of the parameters and structure. RESULTS: Treatment of NSCLC with cemiplimab yielded an extra 1.07 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of $98 211 compared with chemotherapy, associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $91 891/QALY and an incremental net health benefit of 0.087 QALYs at a willingness to pay threshold of $100 000/QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that cemiplimab provided an 83.2% probability of being cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analysis suggested that the price of cemiplimab was the chief driver in this model. A subgroup analysis showed that cemiplimab was the preferred incremental net health benefit in more than half of the subgroups, including patients with squamous type disease and metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Cemiplimab is a cost-effective option in the first-line treatment of NSCLC in patients who are at least 50% PD-L1 positive from an American perspective.
AIMS: The EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial showed that cemiplimab significantly prolongs the duration of progression-free survival and overall survival in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with at least 50% programmed cell death receptor ligand-1 (PD-L1) positivity, yet the financial burden may limit its use. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab versus chemotherapy in a US setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model, with three mutually exclusive health states, was used to compare the expected health outcomes and cost of cemiplimab with chemotherapy. Survival data and transition probabilities were collected from the EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial. Utility values and costs are publicly available from open sources. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted in both the whole population and subgroups to test the robustness of the parameters and structure. RESULTS: Treatment of NSCLC with cemiplimab yielded an extra 1.07 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of $98 211 compared with chemotherapy, associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $91 891/QALY and an incremental net health benefit of 0.087 QALYs at a willingness to pay threshold of $100 000/QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that cemiplimab provided an 83.2% probability of being cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analysis suggested that the price of cemiplimab was the chief driver in this model. A subgroup analysis showed that cemiplimab was the preferred incremental net health benefit in more than half of the subgroups, including patients with squamous type disease and metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Cemiplimab is a cost-effective option in the first-line treatment of NSCLC in patients who are at least 50% PD-L1 positive from an American perspective.