Cost-effectiveness analysis of ceritinib vs. crizotinib in previously untreated anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Hong Kong.

INTRODUCTION: Lower-dose ceritinib (450 mg) once-daily with food was approved in 2018 in Hong Kong (HK) for first-line treatment of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK +) advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study examined the cost-effectiveness of ceritinib vs. crizotinib in the first-line treatment of ALK + NSCLC from a HK healthcare service provider's or government's perspective. METHODS: Costs and effectiveness of first-line ceritinib vs. crizotinib over a 20-year time horizon was evaluated using a partitioned survival model with three health states (stable disease, progressed disease, and death). The efficacy data for ceritinib were obtained from a phase 3 trial comparing ceritinib with chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (ASCEND-4) and extrapolated using parametric survival models. Long-term survival associated with crizotinib were estimated using hazard ratio of crizotinib vs. ceritinib obtained from matching-adjusted indirect comparison based on ASCEND-4 and PROFILE 1014 trials. Drug acquisition, administration, adverse events costs, and medical costs associated with each health state were obtained from public sources and converted to 2018 US Dollars. Incremental costs per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) and life-year (LY) gained were estimated for ceritinib vs. crizotinib. RESULTS: The base case results showed that ceritinib was associated with 3.22 QALYs, 4.51 LYs, and total costs of $157,581 over 20 years. Patients receiving crizotinib had 2.68 QALYs, 3.85 LYs, and $150,424 total costs over the same time horizon. The incremental cost per QALY gained for ceritinib vs crizotinib was $13,343. Results were robust to deterministic sensitivity analyses in most scenarios. CONCLUSION: Ceritinib offers a cost-effective option compared to crizotinib for previously untreated ALK + advanced NCSLC in HK.

Clinical and Economic Impact of Upfront Next-Generation Sequencing for Metastatic NSCLC in East Asia.

Introduction: Upfront next-generation sequencing (NGS) in patients with metastatic NSCLC has been associated with cost savings and shorter time-to-test results in the United States. Nevertheless, this may not apply in jurisdictions where the prevalence of patients with actionable mutations, cost of health care, and reimbursement models differ. Methods: A decision analytical model was built to compare sequential, panel, exclusionary, and upfront NGS testing in patients with metastatic NSCLC in Hong Kong. In sequential and panel testing, patients were tested for genomic alterations (GAs) with treatment followed by sequential or NGS. In exclusionary testing, EGFR and ALK were tested first, followed by NGS. For each modality, the mutation identified, time to receive testing results, and costs (2020 U.S. dollars) were estimated. Results: Exclusionary testing required the shortest time-to-results (1.6 wk) and was most cost saving. In the scenario where all patients used exclusionary testing, a cost saving of $4.6 million was expected relative to current practice, with 90.7% of actionable and 46.5% of nonactionable GAs detected; when all patients used NGS, it would be $2.9 million more expensive with a 100% GA detection rate. Results were sensitive to testing costs and the proportion of patients that continued testing. Conclusions: Exclusionary testing is the best option in terms of cost and time-to-results in Hong Kong. This finding may be applicable for other Asian countries; however, exclusionary testing does not capture all possible GAs. As more GAs become actionable and the cost of NGS declines, NGS may become a cost-saving option.

Cost-effectiveness of switching to biphasic insulin aspart in poorly-controlled type 2 diabetes patients in China.

INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes is an increasing problem in China, yet there is a paucity of data regarding the cost-effectiveness of pharmacological interventions in the Chinese setting. METHODS: Previous data were obtained from PRESENT (Physicians' Routine Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy of NovoMix 30 Therapy), a multi-country, single-arm, observational study where type 2 diabetes patients poorly controlled with biphasic human insulin (BHI) were converted to biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp30); the Chinese subgroup experienced an improvement in HbA(1c) and a reduction in hypoglycaemic events. A published and validated computer simulation model of diabetes (the CORE Diabetes Model) was used to estimate the long-term clinical and cost consequences of switching to BIAsp30 from BHI in the Chinese setting. Treatment effects and patient characteristics were derived from PRESENT and country-specific published sources. Primary research was performed to ascertain patient management practices and diabetes-related complication costs. Risks of modelled complications were derived from landmark clinical trials and epidemiological studies. Costs and clinical projections were made over patient lifetimes from a third-party payer perspective and discounted at 3% annually. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Conversion to BIAsp30 from BHI was projected to improve discounted life expectancy by 0.38 years per patient (9.91 vs 9.53 years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.91 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient (6.32 vs 5.41 QALYs). Conversion to BIAsp30 was associated with increased direct medical costs of Chinese Yuan (CNY) 1751 per patient, due to higher pharmacy and management costs (CNY +19,007), offset by reduced diabetes-related complication costs (CNY -17,254) over patient lifetimes. BIAsp30 was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CNY 1926 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: BIAsp30 was projected to substantially improve clinical outcomes but was associated with increased lifetime medical costs. BIAsp30 would be considered cost-effective in China given a willingness-to-pay threshold of CNY 100,000 per QALY gained in type 2 diabetes patients poorly controlled on BHI.

Utilities for Type 2 Diabetes Treatment-Related Attributes in a South Korean and Taiwanese Population.

OBJECTIVES: To elicit utilities associated with type 2 diabetes medication-related attributes from South Korean and Taiwanese populations and to identify key drivers of preferences. METHODS: Data from 59 respondents from the general population in South Korea and Taiwan were analyzed. Respondents' preferences were elicited using a paper-based standard gamble questionnaire. Health states were designed to identify the utility or disutility of type 2 diabetes medication-related attributes, including dose frequency, nausea/vomiting (hereafter referred to as nausea), and weight change. RESULTS: The mean utility for the basic health state (encompassing current body weight and no nausea) was 0.754 ± 0.155 with weekly dose administration. Respondents showed a preference for weekly over daily administration (average increase in utility of 0.043 across all health states with weekly, vs. daily, administration). Nausea was associated with a decrease in utility (average decrease of -0.034 across all health states with, vs. without, nausea). Weight gain had little effect on utility (average decrease of 0.000 and 0.001 across all health states with, vs. without, 3% and 5% gain, respectively), although weight loss was associated with a small increase in utility (average increase of 0.028 and 0.029 across all health states with, vs. without, 3% and 5% loss, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Utilities associated with type 2 diabetes medication-related attributes were elicited from a general population sample from South Korea and Taiwan. Treatment-related attributes, in particular dose frequency and nausea, had a measurable effect on utility and should be considered when selecting treatment regimens for South Korean or Taiwanese patients with type 2 diabetes.