RESUMEN
AIMS: Fruquintinib is a selective small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-1, -2, and -3 recently approved in the United States (US) for the treatment of adult patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) who have previously been treated with fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based chemotherapy, an anti-VEGF biological therapy, and if RAS wild-type and medically appropriate, anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy. This study aimed to estimate the 5-year budget impact of fruquintinib from a US payer perspective (commercial and Medicare). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A budget impact model was developed to compare two scenarios: a reference scenario in which patients received regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil, or trifluridine/tipiracil with bevacizumab and an alternative scenario in which patients received reference scenario treatments or fruquintinib. Market shares were evenly divided across available options. A 5-year time horizon and a hypothetical health plan of 1 million members was assumed. The model included epidemiological inputs to estimate the eligible population; clinical inputs for treatment duration, progression-free survival, overall survival, and adverse event (AE) frequency; and cost inputs for treatment, AEs, disease management, subsequent therapy, and terminal care costs. Budget impact was reported as total, per member per year (PMPY), and per member per month (PMPM). RESULTS: The model estimated an eligible population of 194 patients (39 per year) over 5 years. In the base case, the estimated 5-year budget impact of fruquintinib was $4,077,073 ($0.82 PMPY and 0.07 PMPM) for a commercial health plan. During the first year, the estimated budget impact was $627,570 ($0.63 PMPY and 0.05 PMPM). Results were robust across sensitivity analyses. PMPM costs from the Medicare perspective were greater than the base-case (commercial) ($0.17 vs. $0.07) due to higher incidence of CRC in that population. CONCLUSIONS: Fruquintinib is associated with a low budget impact for payers based on proposed thresholds in the US.
Fruquintinib is a treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer that has progressed after or not responded to multiple guideline-recommended therapies. This budget impact analysis was conducted to estimate the added costs a health plan would incur over a 5-year period if it chose to cover this therapy. The analysis found that the per plan member per month cost of covering fruquintinib was $0.07 for a United States commercial health plan and $0.17 for Medicare.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Benzofuranos , Bevacizumab , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Piridinas , Timina , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/tratamiento farmacológico , Benzofuranos/uso terapéutico , Benzofuranos/economía , Estados Unidos , Bevacizumab/uso terapéutico , Bevacizumab/economía , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economía , Piridinas/uso terapéutico , Piridinas/economía , Trifluridina/uso terapéutico , Trifluridina/economía , Presupuestos , Quinazolinas/uso terapéutico , Quinazolinas/economía , Compuestos de Fenilurea/uso terapéutico , Compuestos de Fenilurea/economía , Uracilo/análogos & derivados , Uracilo/uso terapéutico , Uracilo/economía , Compuestos Organoplatinos/uso terapéutico , Compuestos Organoplatinos/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Camptotecina/análogos & derivados , Camptotecina/uso terapéutico , Camptotecina/economía , Antineoplásicos/economía , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Irinotecán/uso terapéutico , Irinotecán/economía , Medicare , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/economía , Oxaliplatino/uso terapéutico , Oxaliplatino/economía , Receptores de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Modelos Económicos , Combinación de Medicamentos , PirrolidinasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND The FOHAIC-1 trial showed hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (HAIC-FO) improved survival, compared with sorafenib, in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness comparison between HAIC-FO and sorafenib from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. MATERIAL AND METHODS The economic evaluation was conducted between July 2023 and February 2024, spanning a 10-year investment horizon. A Markov model was developed to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of HAIC-FO vs sorafenib. Health states incorporated in the model comprised progression-free disease, progressed disease, and death. Transition probabilities were derived from data obtained from the FOHAIC-1 trial. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated to evaluate cost-effectiveness. Additionally, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed the model's robustness. RESULTS The HAIC-FO group accrued a total cost of $22,781, whereas the sorafenib group totaled $18,795. In terms of effectiveness, the HAIC-FO group achieved 1.06 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), whereas the sorafenib group attained 0.65 QALYs. Compared with sorafenib, HAIC-FO yielded an additional 0.41 QALYs at a cost of additional $3,985, resulting in an incremental cost of $9,720 per QALY gained. The one-way sensitivity analysis revealed the final ICER remained below the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $30,492 per QALY, when considering parameter fluctuations. Additionally, probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a 99.8% probability that the ICER for HAIC-FO compared with sorafenib would fall below the WTP threshold. CONCLUSIONS Compared with sorafenib, HAIC-FO emerged as a cost-effective first-line treatment option for patients facing advanced HCC in China.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Oxaliplatino , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Sorafenib , Humanos , Sorafenib/uso terapéutico , Sorafenib/economía , Sorafenib/administración & dosificación , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/economía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Hepáticas/economía , China , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economía , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Oxaliplatino/uso terapéutico , Oxaliplatino/economía , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Fluorouracilo/economía , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Cadenas de Markov , Leucovorina/economía , Leucovorina/uso terapéutico , Arteria Hepática , Infusiones Intraarteriales/economía , Masculino , Antineoplásicos/economía , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Análisis de Costo-EfectividadRESUMEN
Aim: The objective of this study was to compare adverse event (AE) management costs for fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) and trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (T/T+bev) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy from the US commercial and Medicare payer perspectives. Materials & methods: A cost-consequence model was developed to calculate the per-patient and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) AE costs using rates of grade 3/4 AEs with incidence ≥5% in clinical trials, event-specific management costs and duration treatment. Anchored comparisons of AE costs were calculated using a difference-in-differences approach with best supportive care (BSC) as a common reference. AE rates and treatment duration were obtained from clinical trials: FRESCO and FRESCO-2 (fruquintinib), RECOURSE (T/T), CORRECT (regorafenib) and SUNLIGHT (T/T, T/T+bev). AE management costs for the commercial and Medicare perspectives were obtained from publicly available sources. Results: From the commercial perspective, the AE costs (presented as per-patient, PPPM) were: $4015, $1091 for fruquintinib (FRESCO); $4253, $1390 for fruquintinib (FRESCO-2); $17,110, $11,104 for T/T (RECOURSE); $9851, $4691 for T/T (SUNLIGHT); $8199, $4823 for regorafenib; and $11,620, $2324 for T/T+bev. These results were consistent in anchored comparisons: the difference-in-difference for fruquintinib based on FRESCO was -$1929 versus regorafenib and -$11,427 versus T/T; for fruquintinib based on FRESCO-2 was -$2257 versus regorafenib and -$11,756 versus T/T. Across all analyses, results were consistent from the Medicare perspective. Conclusion: Fruquintinib was associated with lower AE management costs compared with regorafenib, T/T and T/T+bev for patients with previously treated mCRC. This evidence has direct implications for treatment, formulary and pathways decision-making in this patient population.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Benzofuranos , Bevacizumab , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Compuestos de Fenilurea , Piridinas , Timina , Trifluridina , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/economía , Estados Unidos , Piridinas/economía , Piridinas/uso terapéutico , Piridinas/efectos adversos , Timina/uso terapéutico , Trifluridina/uso terapéutico , Trifluridina/economía , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economía , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Bevacizumab/economía , Bevacizumab/uso terapéutico , Bevacizumab/efectos adversos , Compuestos de Fenilurea/uso terapéutico , Compuestos de Fenilurea/economía , Compuestos de Fenilurea/efectos adversos , Benzofuranos/economía , Benzofuranos/uso terapéutico , Benzofuranos/efectos adversos , Irinotecán/uso terapéutico , Irinotecán/economía , Combinación de Medicamentos , Pirrolidinas/uso terapéutico , Pirrolidinas/economía , Oxaliplatino/economía , Oxaliplatino/uso terapéutico , Oxaliplatino/efectos adversos , Medicare/economía , Camptotecina/análogos & derivados , Camptotecina/uso terapéutico , Camptotecina/economía , Camptotecina/efectos adversos , Quinazolinas/economía , Quinazolinas/uso terapéutico , Quinazolinas/efectos adversos , Compuestos Organoplatinos/economía , Compuestos Organoplatinos/uso terapéutico , Compuestos Organoplatinos/efectos adversos , Uracilo/análogos & derivados , Uracilo/uso terapéutico , Uracilo/economía , Uracilo/efectos adversos , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/economía , Fluorouracilo/efectos adversos , Modelos Económicos , Productos Biológicos/economíaRESUMEN
Patients with PD-L1-positive esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma (ESCC) were significantly more likely to survive when treated with serplulimab plus cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil (serplulimab-CF). At this point, it is unknown whether this expensive therapy is cost-effective. From the Chinese healthcare system's perspective, we aimed to evaluate serplulimab-CF versus CF alone for cost-effectiveness. A partitioned survival model was constructed based on the ASTRUM-007 trial. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. A further analysis of subgroups and scenarios was conducted. The willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $38,258/QALY or $84,866/QALY is defined as three times the per capita gross domestic product value of the general region or affluent region. Compared with CF alone, in the overall (scenario 1), patients with PD-L1 expression level of 1 ≤ CPS < 10 (scenario 2), and patients with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10 (scenario 3) populations, the ICERs were $69,025/QALY, $82,533/QALY, and $75,436/QALY for serplulimab-CF. Nevertheless, the probability of serplulimab-CF becoming cost-effective based on scenarios 1, 2, and 3 is only 2.71%, 0.94%, and 2.84%, respectively, at a WTP threshold of $38,258/QALY. When serplulimab costs < $4.84/mg, serplulimab-CF may be cost-effective at the WTP threshold of $38,258/QALY; otherwise, CF was preferred. Similar results were obtained from sensitivity analyses, suggesting the robustness of these findings. There was no cost-effectiveness in general regions of China for serplulimab-CF in PD-L1-positive ESCC compared to CF, although it is probably considered cost-effective in affluent regions. Serplulimab-CF may achieve favorable cost-effectiveness by lowering the price of serplulimab.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Antígeno B7-H1 , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago , Humanos , Antígeno B7-H1/metabolismo , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago/economía , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Esófago/patología , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economía , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Cisplatino/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/economía , Femenino , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/economía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis de Costo-EfectividadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Metastatic colorectal cancer with KRAS wild type is treated using a range of drug regimens, including fluorouracil, irinotecan, and Leucovorin(FOLFIRI)plus bevacizumab(Bmab), cetuximab(Cmab), or panitumumab(Pmab). The present study aimed to identify the optimal regimen using a decision analysis method, in combination with clinical and economic evidence. METHOD: A simple Markov model with a monthly cycle time was constructed. Probabilistic variables for input into the model were derived from randomized controlled trials. Direct costs for the drugs, laboratory analyses, and medical staff were calculated and used in the model. RESULTS: The expected survival times and costs of FOLFIRI alone and combination therapies were 20.9 months and 2,299,198 yen for FOLFIRI, 29.9 months and 8,929,888 yen for Bmab, 27.8 months and 11,811,849 yen for Cmab, and 22.6 months and 8,795,622 yen for Pmab. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios to FOLFIRI were 736,743 yen/month for Bmab, 1,378,645 yen/month for Cmab, and 3,821,426 yen/month for Pmab. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggested that these regimens were not sufficiently cost-effective, although they have excellent therapeutic efficacy. From the economic point of view, these combination regimens were inferior to FOLFIRI alone.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Camptotecina , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Fluorouracilo , Leucovorina , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Leucovorina/economía , Leucovorina/uso terapéutico , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/economía , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/economía , Camptotecina/análogos & derivados , Camptotecina/economía , Camptotecina/administración & dosificación , Camptotecina/uso terapéutico , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Análisis de Costo-EfectividadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend ivosidenib followed by modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX) for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations. Taiwan National Health Insurance covers only fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) chemotherapy for this ICC group, and there has been no prior economic evaluation of ivosidenib. Therefore, we aimed to assess ivosidenib's cost-effectiveness in previously treated, advanced ICC-presenting IDH1 mutations compared with mFOLFOX or 5-FU/LV. METHODS: A 3-state partitioned survival model was employed to assess ivosidenib's cost-effectiveness over a 10-year horizon with a 3% discount rate, setting the willingness-to-pay threshold at 3 times the 2022 GDP per capita. Efficacy data for Ivosidenib, mFOLFOX, and 5-FU/LV were sourced from the ClarIDHy, ABC06, and NIFTY trials, respectively. Ivosidenib's cost was assumed to be NT$10,402/500 mg. Primary outcomes included incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and net monetary benefit. Deterministic sensitivity analyses (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were employed to evaluate uncertainty and explore price reduction scenarios. RESULTS: Ivosidenib exhibited ICERs of NT$6,268,528 and NT$5,670,555 compared with mFOLFOX and 5-FU/LV, respectively, both exceeding the established threshold. PSA revealed that ivosidenib was unlikely to be cost-effective, except when it was reduced to NT$4,161 and NT$5,201/500 mg when compared with mFOLFOX and 5-FU/LV, respectively. DSA underscored the significant influence of ivosidenib's cost and utility values on estimate uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: At NT$10,402/500 mg, ivosidenib was not cost-effective for IDH1-mutant ICC patients compared with mFOLFOX or 5-FU/LV, indicating that a 50-60% price reduction is necessary for ivosidenib to be cost-effective in this patient group.