Financial Implications of Avapritinib for Treatment of Unresectable Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors in Patients With a PDGFRA Exon 18 Variant or After 3 Previous Therapies in a Hypothetical US Health Plan.

Importance: With the approval of avapritinib for adults with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) harboring a platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA) exon 18 variant, including PDGFRA D842V variants, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline recommendations as an option for patients with GIST after third-line treatment, it is important to estimate the potential financial implications of avapritinib on a payer's budget. Objective: To estimate the budget impact associated with the introduction of avapritinib to a formulary for metastatic or unresectable GISTs in patients with a PDGFRA exon 18 variant or after 3 or more previous treatments from the perspective of a US health plan. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this economic evaluation, a 3-year budget impact model was developed in March 2020, incorporating costs for drug acquisition, testing, monitoring, adverse events, and postprogression treatment. The model assumed that avapritinib introduction would be associated with increased PDGFRA testing rates from the current 49% to 69%. The health plan population was assumed to be mixed 69% commercial, 22% Medicare, and 9% Medicaid. Base case assumptions included a GIST incidence rate of 9.6 diagnoses per million people, a metastatic PDGFRA exon 18 mutation rate of 1.9%, and progression rate from first-line to fourth-line treatment of 17%. Exposures: The model compared scenarios with and without avapritinib in a formulary. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual, total, and per member per month (PMPM) budget impact. Results: In a hypothetical 1-million member plan, fewer than 0.1 new patients with a PDGFRA exon 18 variant per year and 1.2 patients receiving fourth-line therapy per year were eligible for treatment. With avapritinib available, the total increase in costs in year 3 for all eligible adult patients with a PDGFRA exon 18 variant was $46 875, or $0.004 PMPM. For patients undergoing fourth-line treatment, the total increase in costs in year 3 was $69 182, or $0.006 PMPM. The combined total budget impact in year 3 was $115 604, or $0.010 PMPM, including an offset of $3607 in postprogression costs avoided or delayed. The higher rates of molecular testing resulted in a minimal incremental testing cost of $453 in year 3. Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that adoption of avapritinib as a treatment option would have a minimal budget impact to a hypothetical US health plan. This would be primarily attributable to the small eligible patient population and cost offsets from reduced or delayed postprogression costs.

Population-based utilization and costs associated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors for first-line treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia among elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Following approval of imatinib, a breakthrough tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), survival significantly improved by more than 20% since 2001 among treated chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) patients. Subsequently, more expensive second-generation TKIs with varying selectivity profiles have been approved. Population-based studies are needed to evaluate the real-world utilization of TKI therapies, particularly given their escalating costs and recommendations for maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the utilization patterns of first-line TKIs, overall and by specific agent, among elderly CML patients in the United States, and the cost implications. METHODS: CML patients aged 65 years and older at diagnosis between 2007 and 2015 were identified from population-based cancer registries in the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. The percentage of CML patients receiving imatinib, dasatinib, or nilotinib within the first year of diagnosis was calculated along with time to first-line treatment initiation. Bivariate comparisons and Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors associated with TKI initiation. Average monthly patient responsibility, including patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, stratified by Part D low-income subsidy (LIS) status were also calculated. RESULTS: Among the 1,589 CML patients included, receipt of any TKI within 1 year of diagnosis increased from 66.2% to 78.9%. In 2015, the distribution of first-line TKI therapies was 41.3% imatinib, 28.3% dasatinib, and 9.3% nilotinib. Almost 60% of patients initiated TKI treatment within 3 months of diagnosis. Multivariable analysis indicated that TKI use in the first year was lower among the very elderly (aged > 75 years vs. 65-69 years: HR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.63-0.83), patients with more comorbidities (Hierarchical Condition Category risk score > 2 vs. HR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.62-0.88), and patients ineligible for LIS (HR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.65-0.87). Average monthly patient OOP cost was significantly lower for LIS-eligible versus LIS-ineligible patients: imatinib (2016: $12 vs. $487), dasatinib (2016: $34 vs. $557), and nilotinib (2016: $1 vs. $526). CONCLUSIONS: TKI use has increased significantly since 2007. While imatinib remained the most frequently prescribed first-line agent, by 2015 newer TKIs represented one third of the market share. Utilization patterns indicated persistent age, comorbidity, and financial barriers. TKI use is indicated for long-term therapy, and increased adoption of newer, more expensive agents raises concerns about the sustained affordability of CML treatment, particularly among unsubsidized patients. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. There are no reported conflicts of interest.

Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Therapy Initiation Strategies for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

OBJECTIVES: Overall survival in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in chronic phase is not significantly different by treatment with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), but emerging evidence reveals differences in costs and safety profiles. We evaluated the 1-year cost-effectiveness of TKI initiation with imatinib, dasatinib, or nilotinib among a hypothetical cohort of incident patients with CML from a US payer's perspective. METHODS: We constructed a decision analytic model to assess quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), healthcare costs, net monetary benefit, and incremental cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies. We used published studies and data from the IBM Watson Health MarketScan database for model parameters. To calculate TKI costs, we used the 2018 Federal Supply Schedule estimates for generic imatinib and branded second-generation TKIs. We evaluated cost-effectiveness under various willingness-to-pay thresholds. We accounted for uncertainty with deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, imatinib was favored over dasatinib and nilotinib at a lower cost per QALY gained. Imatinib remained the favored strategy after 1-way variations in TKI costs, TKI switching, QALYs, adverse event risk, and CML progression. When we assessed model uncertainty with prespecified parameter distributions, imatinib was cost-saving compared with dasatinib in 40% of 100 0000 simulations and was favored over all simulations compared with nilotinib. First-line treatment with second-generation TKIs was cost-effective in 50% of simulations at a $200 000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Generic availability of imatinib provides a more cost-effective treatment approach in the first year compared with other available TKIs for newly diagnosed patients with CML.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Genetic Testing and Tailored First-Line Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

Importance: Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is frequently driven by oncogenic KIT variations. Imatinib targeting of KIT marked a new era in GIST treatment and ushered in precision oncological treatment for all solid malignant neoplasms. However, studies on the molecular biological traits of GIST have found that tumors respond differentially to imatinib dosage based on the KIT exon with variation. Despite this knowledge, few patients undergo genetic testing at diagnosis, and empirical imatinib therapy remains routine. Barriers to genetic profiling include concerns about the cost and utility of testing. Objective: To determine whether targeted gene testing (TGT) is a cost-effective diagnostic for patients with metastatic GIST from the US payer perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation developed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of TGT and tailored first-line therapy compared with empirical imatinib therapy among patients with a new diagnosis of metastatic GIST. The main health outcome, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs were obtained from the literature, and transitional probabilities were modeled from disease progression and survival estimates from randomized clinical trials of patients with metastatic GIST. Data analyses were conducted October 2019 to January 2020. Exposure: TGT and tailored first-line therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was QALYs and cost. Cost-effectiveness was defined using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio less than $100 000/QALY considered cost-effective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess model stability. Results: Therapy directed by TGT was associated with an increase of 0.10 QALYs at a cost of $9513 compared with the empirical imatinib approach, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $92 100. These findings were sensitive to the costs of TGT, drugs, and health utility model inputs. Therapy directed by TGT remained cost-effective for genetic testing costs up to $3730. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that TGT-directed therapy was considered cost-effective 70% of the time. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that using genetic testing to match treatment of KIT variations to imatinib dosing is a cost-effective approach compared with empirical imatinib.

Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and the Relationship With Adherence, Costs, and Health Care Utilization in Commercially Insured Patients With Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: A Retrospective Claims-Based Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association among tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) out-of-pocket costs, adherence, and health care costs and utilization in a large group of commercially insured patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with CML aged 18 to 64 years were identified using IBM MarketScan Commercial Database between April 1, 2011 and December 31, 2014. Patients were required to be continuously enrolled 3 months before and 12 months after TKI (imatinib, dasatinib, or nilotinib) initiation. TKI adherence is estimated using the proportion of days covered (PDC), defined as the percentage of the PDC by the prescription fill during the 12-month study period (adherent patients have PDC ≥80%). Health care cost differences between adherent and nonadherent patients were estimated using generalized linear models. Health care utilization was compared using negative binomial regression models. All models were controlled for potential confounding factors. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 863 patients, where 355 (41.1%) patients were classified as adherent. Over the study period, nonadherent patients incurred US$10,974 more in medical costs (P<0.001), and US$1663 more in non-TKI pharmacy costs (P<0.01). Adherent patients incurred US$28,184 more in TKI pharmacy costs (P<0.001) that resulted in US$18,305 more in overall total health care costs (P<0.001). Adherent patients, however, were estimated to be less likely to have all-cause hospitalizations (incidence rate ratio, 0.32; P<0.001), or CML-specific hospitalizations (incidence rate ratio, 0.31; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CML with better adherence experienced fewer hospitalizations, resulting in medical service cost savings. These lower medical costs, however, were more than offset by higher TKI medication costs observed during the first year of TKI therapy.

Expenditures for First- and Second-Generation Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Before and After Transition of Imatinib to Generic Status.

Importance: Imatinib introduced a paradigm shift in the treatment of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), allowing a lifespan that is almost comparable to the general population. However, the health care expenditures associated with imatinib have increased steadily since its introduction in 2001. Since the generic market entry of imatinib on February 1, 2016, it became possible to determine the effect of generic entry on the health care expenditures associated with imatinib, along with the concurrent pricing trends of second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Objective: To compare health care expenditure related to imatinib treatment for patients with CML prior to its generic status with expenditures after, in a real-world setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study using data from the Truven Health MarketScan Database was carried out including 1301 commercially insured patients or patients with Medicaid between the ages of 18 and 64 years with a CML diagnosis between September 1, 2014 and December 31, 2017. A single interrupted time series (ITS) method was used to evaluate monthly expenditures associated with imatinib for the health plan from September 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017, with imatinib switching to generic on February 1, 2016, as the interruption. The initial 6-month period postinterruption was excluded to allow for the new price structure to stabilize. Nilotinib and dasatinib were evaluated using a comparative ITS design. The analysis took place between September 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Commercial and Medicaid health plan expenditure and patient cost responsibility for 30-day blocks per patient for imatinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib were calculated from September 1, 2014 through December 31, 2017. Pricing was adjusted via 2017 consumer price index for medical services. Results: The sample included a total of 1301 patients (1102 commercially insured and 199 insured through Medicaid) with a median (range) age at diagnosis of 50 (18-62) years for commercially insured patients and 50 (47-52) years for patients with Medicaid. Of the 1301 patients, 704 (54.1%) were men. There was a significant pregeneric increase in expenditure (commercially insured: $143 per patient per month, P < .001; Medicaid: $152 per patient per month, P = .001). There was a significant reduction over the 6-month interruption period (February 2016 through August 2016) between the pregeneric and generic phase (commercial: $-3097 per patient, P < .001; Medicaid: $-2077 per patient, P = .002). Controlling for secular trends, this was followed by a small decline in expenditure during the generic phase (commercially insured: -$93 per patient per month; P = .03; Medicaid: -$182 per patient per month; P = .001). Nilotinib and dasatinib maintained an increasing trend in both the pregeneric and generic phase of imatinib, resulting in a significant difference-in-difference slope for commercially insured patients (nilotinib: -$186, P = .006; dasatinib: -$175, P = .007) and patients with Medicaid (nilotinib: -$299, P = .002; dasatinib: -$329, P < .001). There were no significant trends for patient cost responsibility. Conclusions and Relevance: The modest decline in expenditure associated with imatinib after generic entry accompanied by the increasing expenditure trends associated with the second-generation TKIs suggest a need for measures to facilitate cost reduction as well as standardization of CML treatment.

Cost effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring for imatinib administration in chronic myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Imatinib mesylate (IM) is a first-line treatment option for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Patients who fail or are intolerant to IM therapy are treated with more expensive second and third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Patients show wide variation in trough concentrations in response to standard dosing. Thus, many patients receive subtherapeutic or supratherapeutic doses. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) may improve dose management that, in turn, may reduce costs and improve outcomes. However, TDM also adds to the cost of patient care. The objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of TDM for generic IM therapy. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model for the trough plasma concentration of IM which is related to a cytogenetic or molecular response. We compared two cohorts: one with TDM and one without TDM (NTDM). The lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as the effectiveness measure. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The lifetime cost and QALY of treatment with TDM were $2,137K [95% Ci: 2,079K; 2,174K] and 12.37 [95% CI: 12.07; 12.55], respectively. The cost and QALY of NTDM were $2,132K [95% CI: 2,091K; 2,197K] and 12.23 [95% CI: 11.96; 12.50], respectively. The incremental cost and QALY for TDM relative to NTDM was $4,417 [95% CI: -52,582; 32,097]) and 0.15 [95% CI: -0.13; 0.28]. The ICER for TDM relative to NTDM was $30,450/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that TDM was cost-effective relative to NTDM in 90% of the tested scenarios at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Although the impact of TDM is modest, the cost-effectiveness over a lifetime horizon (societal perspective, ($30,450/QALY) falls within the acceptable range (< $100k/QALY).

Initiation of generic imatinib may improve medication adherence for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia.

PURPOSE: To compare adherence to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) between patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) who initiated branded or generic imatinib. METHODS: We used MarketScan commercial claims data (January 2011-June 2018) to identify patients with CML who newly initiated branded imatinib before 1 August 2015 or generic imatinib on or after 2 February 2016, and were continuously enrolled in health plans for 6 months before through 6 months following their initial fill. After inverse probability of treatment weighting, we compared adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC]) and persistence (no gaps ≥30 and ≥60 consecutive days in therapy) to TKI therapy. RESULTS: Patients initiating generic imatinib consistently had higher average PDC per month and over the 6-month follow-up period than initiators of branded imatinib. Average 6-month PDC was 92% (95%CI:89%-94%) for generic initiators and 85% (95%CI:83%-86%) for brand initiators. Compared with branded imatinib initiators, a larger proportion of generic imatinib initiators were adherent and persistent to TKI therapy (PDC ≥ 90%:78% versus 64%; no≥60-day gap:94% versus 86%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients initiating generic imatinib achieved clinically significant improvements in adherence to TKI therapy relative to branded drug users, presumably due to lower out-of-pocket costs. Given the importance of optimal adherence in CML, considering barriers to adherence (eg, patient-cost sharing and health benefit design) when selecting initial treatment may improve long-term medication adherence. Pharmacoepidemiologic studies should consider how best to account for expected cost-sharing and its impact on adherence and subsequent clinical outcomes.

Budget Impact of Treatment-Free Remission in Treating Chronic-Phase Philadelphia-Positive Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Lebanon.

PURPOSE: Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) ranks second in terms of disease-related health care expenditures at the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) after breast cancer. With the introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), survival of patients with CML has dramatically improved and approached that of the normal population. In recent years, several studies demonstrated that patients who achieve a deep molecular response while receiving TKI therapy could safely attempt treatment-free remission (TFR), the new treatment goal in patients with CML. The objective is to estimate the budget impact of TFR at the MoPH. METHODS: Analyses were done on 162 patients with CML receiving imatinib, nilotinib, or dasatinib, as first-line or second-line therapy, over a 4-year time horizon using MoPH drug pricing. The model assumed that patients could attempt TFR after 36 months of TKI therapy, where the last 24 months were at stable molecular response as per MoPH and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Duration of TFR was based on European Stop Kinase Inhibitor treatment-free survival curve. RESULTS: Out of the 162 patients, 83 were eligible to attempt TFR, 36 patients were not eligible, 32 patients were lost to follow-up, two patients died as a result of CML progression, and five died as a result of other causes. The total cost of CML treatment with TFR from the time of analysis and over 4 years can be reduced by more than 7 million US dollars (57%). CONCLUSION: The model can be used to inform health care decision makers on the importance of TFR and the potential savings.

Treatment value of second-generation BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors compared with imatinib to achieve treatment-free remission in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment-free remission in chronic myeloid leukaemia-ie, achievement of a sustained deep molecular response leading to discontinuation of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy-has become a potential aim of therapy. Highly priced second-generation TKIs might offer deep molecular response status more quickly and for more patients than imatinib; however, with the availability and lower cost of generic imatinib, the value of second-generation TKIs as frontline therapy for this particular treatment endpoint remains unknown. We aimed to assess the potential value of second-generation TKIs used as frontline therapy in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia in chronic phase in relation to the probability of achieving sustained deep molecular responses compared with generic imatinib, and the associated cost of each modality. METHODS: We used a decision analytic model to consider the value of different TKI approaches from the payer's perspective. The proportion of patients achieving sustained deep molecular response after 5 years of treatment in chronic phase was estimated at 26% with imatinib and 44% with second-generation TKIs. We also modelled more favourable scenarios of the proportion of patients achieving such response with second-generation TKIs at 66%, 88%, and a near-perfect response of 99%. For each scenario, we examined the impact of the combination of health utilities for chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukaemia (base case 0·89, range 0-1) and the annual cost of second-generation TKIs (base case US$152 814 [ie, the price of nilotinib in the USA], range 0-240 000) on the cost-effectiveness of second-generation TKIs compared with generic imatinib. We used different price scenarios for generic imatinib in the USA (average price $35 000 per year; lowest price $4400 per year), Europe ($4000 per year), and developing countries ($2100 per year). We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and assessed cost-effectiveness by considering two societal willingness-to-pay thresholds: $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in all markets and $200 000 per QALY in the USA. FINDINGS: In the base case, we obtained an ICER of $22 765 208, meaning that second-generation TKIs as frontline therapy to achieve sustained deep molecular response was not cost-effective under either of the societal willingness-to-pay thresholds. In our sensitivity analyses, none of the explored scenarios showed potential treatment value for use of second-generation TKIs at the current prices in the USA or at the price of $30 000-40 000 per year elsewhere. For example, considering a scenario in the USA using second-generation TKIs versus imatinib (annual price $4400 per year) with the potential benefit in favour of second-generation TKI (willingness to pay $200 000 per QALY, 66% of patients achieving sustained deep molecular response, and health utility of the chronic phase of 0·1), the cost of second-generation TKIs would need to be less than $25 000 per year to be a cost-effective option. Under the same conditions in developing nations, with a price of generic imatinib of $2100 per year and a willingness to pay of $50 000 per QALY, the annual price of second-generation TKIs should not exceed $10 000 per year of therapy. INTERPRETATION: Considering the current prices of second-generation TKIs and of generic imatinib under different pricing scenarios in the USA, Europe, and developing countries, second-generation TKIs at current prices do not offer good value as frontline therapy in chronic myeloid leukaemia in order to achieve sustained deep molecular response and treatment-free remission. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Optimizing the dose in patients treated with imatinib as first line treatment for gastrointestinal stromal tumours: A cost-effectiveness study.

AIMS: Patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) are treated in first line with the oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor, imatinib, until progressive disease. With this fixed dosing regimen, only approximately 40% of patients reach adequate plasma levels within the therapeutic index. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a solution to reach plasma levels within the therapeutic index. However, introducing TDM will also increase costs, due to prolonged imatinib use and laboratory costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TDM in patients with metastatic/unresectable GIST treated with imatinib as a first line treatment, compared with fixed dosing. METHODS: A survival model was created to simulate progression, mortality and treatment costs over a 5-year time horizon, comparing fixed dosing vs TDM-guided dosing. The outcomes measured were treatments costs, life-years and quality-adjusted life-years. RESULTS: Total costs over the 5-year time horizon were estimated to be €106 994.85 and €150 477.08 for fixed dosing vs TDM-guided dosing, respectively. A quality-adjusted life year gain of 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.66-0.90) was estimated with TDM-guided dosing compared to fixed dosing. An average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €58 785.70 per quality-adjusted life year gained was found, mainly caused by longer use and higher dosages of imatinib. CONCLUSION: Based on the currently available data, this analysis suggests that TDM-guided dosing may be a cost-effective intervention for patients with metastatic/unresectable GIST treated with imatinib which will be improved when imatinib losses its patency.

Economic modeling to evaluate the impact of chronic myeloid leukemia therapy management on the oncology care model in the US.

Objective: To develop an economic model to evaluate changes in healthcare costs driven by restricting usage of branded tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) through substitution with generic imatinib among chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients in a typical Oncology Care Model (OCM) practice, and examine the impact on Performance-Based Payment (PBP) eligibility. Methods: An Excel-based economic model of an OCM practice with 1,000 cancer patients during a 6-month episode of care was developed. Cancer types and proportions of patients treated in the practice were estimated from an OCM report. All-cause healthcare costs were obtained from published literature. It was assumed that if a practice restricts usage of branded TKIs for newly-diagnosed CML patients, 80% of the market share of branded imatinib and 50% of the market shares of 2nd-gen TKIs would shift to generic imatinib. Among established TKI-treated patients, it was assumed that 80% of the market share of branded imatinib and no patients treated with 2nd-gen TKIs would shift to the generic. Results: Four CML patients were estimated for a 1,000-cancer patient OCM practice with a total baseline healthcare cost of $51,345,812 during a 6-month episode. If the practice restricts usage of branded TKIs, the shift from 2nd-gen TKIs to generic imatinib would reduce costs by $12,970, while shifting from branded to generic imatinib lowers costs by $25,250 during a 6-month episode. Minimum reductions of $3,013,832 in a one-sided risk model and $2,372,010 in a two-sided risk model are required for PBP eligibility; the shift from 2nd-gen TKIs to generic imatinib would account for 0.4% and 0.5% of the savings required for a PBP, respectively. Conclusions: This analysis indicates that the potential cost reduction associated with restricting branded TKI usage among CML patients in an OCM setting will represent only a small proportion of the cost reduction needed for PBP eligibility.

Comparative efficacy and safety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for chronic myeloid leukaemia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The pharmacotherapy of chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) is mainly based on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of all TKIs in CML patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including imatinib, nilotinib, dasatinib, bosutinib, radotinib and ponatinib. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and SciELo (March 2018). The NMAs were built for six outcomes at 12 months: complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), major cytogenetic response (MCyR), deep molecular response, major molecular response (MMR), complete haematologic response and incidence of serious adverse events. We conducted rank order and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analyses. RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs were included (n = 5079 patients). Statistical differences were observed for some comparisons in all outcomes. Imatinib 400 mg was considered the safest drug (SUCRA values of 10.3%) but presented low efficacy. Overall, nilotinib 600 mg was superior to the other TKI in efficacy (SUCRA values of 61.1% for CCyR, 81.0% for MMR, 90.0% for MCyR); however, no data on its safety profile at 12 months were reported. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that nilotinib should be upgraded to first-line therapy for CML, although further cost-effectiveness analyses, including the new TKI (i.e., ponatinib, radotinib), are needed.

Economic Evaluations of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Middle- and High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to conduct a comprehensive assessment of economic evaluations of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in middle- and high-income countries. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE (via PubMed) and the Cochrane library on March 3, 2018 to identify economic evaluations of chronic myeloid leukemia that met the inclusion criteria. Data on such parameters as patient characteristics, cost components, and main outcomes were extracted from eligible studies. RESULTS: The literature review retrieved 798 studies, 17 of which fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Eight studies included an economic analysis on newly diagnosed patients with CML. Seven studies investigated people with CML who were resistant or intolerant to standard-dose imatinib. One article focused on chronic phase (CP)-CML patients who experienced failure with first-line treatment for interferon-α. The last study investigated advanced stages of CML patients. Most studies (n = 70.6%) were conducted in high-income countries. Only five studies (n = 29.4%) were performed in middle-income countries. Most studies used a Markov model. The time horizon varied from six months to life-time. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high costs, the included studies indicate that imatinib regimens are cost effective in newly diagnosed patients with CP-CML. For people with CML who are resistant or intolerant to standard-dose imatinib, dasatinib is likely to be a more cost-effective strategy in middle-income countries. More studies are necessary to assess the long-term efficacy and cost effectiveness of novel treatment options.

Cost-Effectiveness of Carbon Ion Radiation Therapy for Skull Base Chordoma Utilizing Long-Term (10-Year) Outcome Data.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) offers high conformality and ability to dose-escalate skull base chordomas, with promising clinical data. However, it is an imperative measure to economically justify the use of such high-priced new technologies. Herein, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of CIRT compared to photon radiotherapy (PRT) using 10-year outcome data extrapolated to a 34-year time frame. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data regarding costs of PRT, as well as 10-year outcomes were obtained from published sources. Corresponding figures for CIRT were acquired from institutional and published sources. Adjustment was made in order to compare both cost figures, including elimination of additional financing and follow-up, so that only direct costs of treatment and the cost of progression were compared between both modalities. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as the difference in cost between both modalities divided by the difference in 34-year quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) outcomes. The annual gross domestic product per capita cost-effectiveness threshold definition (as recommended by the WHO) was employed. RESULTS: The total cost of a complete course of CIRT (20-22 fractions) was €31,538.21. After removal of financing and follow-up costs, the adjusted direct cost of CIRT utilized for comparison was €18,957.78. In a previous publication, the cost of PRT was €4,700.00. ICERs were based upon these direct cost figures and the average of reported 10-year progression-free survival (PFS) values with PRT (41.1%) and CIRT (54%), as well as gained PFS years (10.66 years CIRT, 8.58 years PRT). QALYs were 6.65 for photon RT and 8.26 for CIRT, a difference of 1.61 discounted lifetime QALYs for patients treated with CIRT. The overall ICER was €8,855.76/QALY. If the cost of progression/recurrence treated with imatinib were included into the calculation, the total ICER was €170.61/QALY. CONCLUSION: CIRT is a highly cost-effective option to treat chordoma.

Out-of-Pocket Spending Not Associated with Oral Oncolytic Survival Benefit.

BACKGROUND: With total and out-of-pocket spending for oral oncolytics rising, there is increased interest in choosing oncology treatments based on their clinical value relative to cost. OBJECTIVE: To determine if out-of-pocket spending varied for higher versus lower benefit oral oncology drugs reimbursed by commercial insurers. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of commercial insurer prescription drug claims filed between 2007 and 2014 for 13 oral oncolytics approved before 2009. We calculated mean monthly out-of-pocket payment for each fill by patient. We then categorized oral oncolytics by their overall and progression-free survival benefits for each FDA-approved indication, using evidence from published studies. We assessed the relationship of survival benefit with mean monthly out-of-pocket payment, adjusting for demographic and plan characteristics. RESULTS: Our population included 44,113 patients aged 18-65 years (mean 52.5 [SD 9.4]) with a cancer diagnosis who filled 731,354 prescriptions. The most commonly represented oncolytics were imatinib (37.4% of fills), lenalidomide (17.7% of fills), and dasatinib (10.0% of fills). Approximately 32.3% of fills were for drug-indication pairs with an overall survival benefit of 4+ years. In adjusted analyses, there was no clear pattern to suggest that out-of-pocket payments differed with drug indication-specific survival benefits. Drugs for indications providing > 0 to 1 year of overall survival benefit were significantly more likely to have a lower out-of-pocket payment versus those prescribed off-label, but there were no significant differences in out-of-pocket payments between drugs and associated indications in any other survival category versus drugs used off-label. CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-pocket payments for oral oncolytics were not clearly related to indication-specific value in commercially insured patients. This finding suggests that despite increased attention to value- and indication-based drug pricing, cost sharing for oral oncolytics does not currently reflect these goals. DISCLOSURES: This project was supported by Research Scholar Grant RSGI-14-030-01-CPHPS from the American Cancer Society; the NIH Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) K12 Program; the North Carolina Translational and Clinical Sciences Institute (UL1TR001111) Grant; and K24CA181510 from the National Cancer Institute. The authors have no disclosures. Data from this study were presented at the 2017 American Society for Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting on June 5, 2017, in Chicago, Illinois.

Generic Price Competition For Specialty Drugs: Too Little, Too Late?

The case of generic imatinib demonstrates several potential barriers to effective generic price competition for specialty prescription drugs, including fewer market entrants, smaller-than-expected price reductions, shifts in prescribing toward more expensive brand-name treatments, and limited uptake of the generic product.

Cost Effectiveness of Imatinib, Dasatinib, and Nilotinib as First-Line Treatment for Chronic-Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in China.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have obvious effects on chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), but they are expensive in China. Moreover, the overall cost of treatment of CML is high and the medical economic burden of patients with CML on the government is heavy. This study tested the cost effectiveness of imatinib, nilotinib, and dasatinib as first-line treatment in Chinese patients who were first diagnosed with chronic myeloid leukemia in the chronic phase (CML-CP). METHODS: A state-transition Markov model combining clinical effectiveness, utility, and cost data was used. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine the robustness of the model outcomes. RESULTS: The imatinib-first, dasatinib-first, and nilotinib-first strategy offered patients 9.76, 9.87, and 9.72 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at a cost of US$303,502.42, US$381,681.03, and US$305,509.92 over 20 years, respectively. The nilotinib-first strategy exhibited the lowest utility and highest price and was thus eliminated. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis of the imatinib-first strategy and the dasatinib-first strategy showed that the dasatinib-first strategy yielded an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICER) of 710,714.64 $/QALY compared with the imatinib-first strategy, which exceeded the threshold; hence, the dasatinib-first strategy was not cost effective and was eliminated. The results were robust for multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: From the perspective of the Chinese medical system, imatinib is likely to be more cost effective than dasatinib and nilotinib for patients who were first diagnosed with CML-CP.