Clinician Concepts of Cure in Adult Relapsed and Refractory Philadelphia-Negative B Cell Precursor Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Delphi Study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the poor prognosis for adults with relapsed or refractory (RR) Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)-negative B cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), long-term survival is possible and may even be considered as "cure". METHODS: This study used a Delphi panel approach to explore concepts of cure in RR Ph-negative B cell precursor ALL. Ten European experts in this disease area participated in a survey and face-to-face panel meeting. RESULTS: Findings showed that clinicians conceptualize "cure" as a combination of three broad treatment outcomes that vary depending on the treatment stage: complete remission early in treatment (1-3 months) indicates initial success; eradicating cancer cells (minimal residual disease negative status) consolidates the early clinical response; leukemia-free survival is required in the long term. CONCLUSIONS: Although such terminology remains contested, clinicians would begin considering "cure" as early as 2 years provided the patient is off therapy, with most considering the term applicable by the third year. FUNDING: Amgen Inc.

Autoimmune comorbidities in patients with metastatic melanoma: a retrospective analysis of us claims data.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapies have advanced the treatment of metastatic melanoma; however, they are associated with immune-related toxicities. Patients with pre-existing autoimmune comorbidities are commonly excluded from clinical trials investigating immunotherapies in metastatic melanoma. Since information on pre-existing autoimmune comorbidities in "real-world" patients with newly diagnosed metastatic melanoma is limited, we sought to estimate the prevalence of autoimmune comorbidities and its change over time. METHODS: Data were obtained from a large US claims database, MarketScan®, from 2004 to 2014. Records of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic or non-metastatic melanoma and of general population were analyzed. Autoimmune comorbidities were defined as presence of autoimmune disorders, which were obtained from the list of diseases at the American Autoimmune-Related Diseases Association web portal ( www.aarda.org ). The prevalence of pre-existing autoimmune comorbidities and its change over the 11-year period were calculated. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relationship between clinical and demographic factors and pre-existing autoimmune comorbidities in patients with metastatic melanoma. RESULTS: This study assessed the prevalence and change of prevalence over a period of 11 years of 147 autoimmune comorbidities. Among 12,028 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic melanoma, the prevalence rate of pre-existing autoimmune comorbidities increased from 17.1% in 2004 to 28.3% in 2014 (P < 0.001). The prevalence rates of autoimmune comorbidities increased from 11.7% in 2004 to 19.8% in 2014 in patients with non-metastatic melanoma and 7.9% in 2004 to 9.2% in 2014 in the general population. In addition, patients with bone or gastrointestinal melanoma metastases, those with more comorbid diseases, or female patients, were found to have a higher risk of autoimmune comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of pre-existing autoimmune comorbidities in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic melanoma was high, and increased over 11 years. In comparison, a lower prevalence of autoimmune comorbidities was seen in patients with newly diagnosed non-metastatic melanoma and in the general population. Increases in prevalence for these population groups were also observed over 11 years. Impact of autoimmune comorbidities on treatment decisions in patients with metastatic melanoma should be explored.

Patterns of use of systemic therapies among patients with metastatic melanoma: a retrospective claims database analysis in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: This retrospective analysis of the IMS PharMetrics Plus claims database aimed to describe the current real-world treatment patterns for metastatic melanoma in the USA. METHODS: Included patients (aged ≥18 years) had ≥1 prescription for ipilimumab, vemurafenib, temozolomide or dacarbazine between 1 January 2011 and 31 August 2013; diagnosis of melanoma and metastasis before first use (index date); no index drug use prior to the index date; continuous health plan enrollment for ≥6 months before and ≥3 months after index date. Proportion of days covered (PDC) was defined as days exposed to index therapy divided by continuously enrolled days between index date and last prescription date. RESULTS: Overall, 1043 patients were included (median age 57 years, 63% male), of whom 39% received the index drug ipilimumab, 35% vemurafenib, 19% temozolomide and 7% dacarbazine. Mean treatment duration (days) was 174 (vemurafenib), 100 (temozolomide) and 64 (dacarbazine). Mean PDC was 81% (vemurafenib), 67% (temozolomide) and 51% (dacarbazine). For patients receiving ipilimumab, 58% had the full 4 doses, 20% 3 doses, 14% 2 doses and 9% 1 dose only for the first induction course; 4% received re-induction, and none had a second re-induction. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insights into the treatment patterns for metastatic melanoma, including newer agents, in real-world clinical practice.

Relative Efficacy of Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor, Dacarbazine, and Glycoprotein 100 in Metastatic Melanoma: An Indirect Treatment Comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Advances in the treatment of metastatic melanoma have been achieved in recent years: immunotherapies and targeted therapies have demonstrated survival benefits over older agents such as granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), dacarbazine, and glycoprotein peptide vaccine (gp100) in pivotal phase 3 trials. It is important to compare therapies to guide the treatment decision-making process, and establishing the relationship between older agents can strengthen the networks of evidence for newer therapies. We report the outcome of an indirect comparison of GM-CSF, dacarbazine, and gp100 in metastatic melanoma through meta-analysis of absolute treatment effect. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified trials for inclusion in the meta-analysis. A valid network meta-analysis was not feasible: treatment-specific meta-analysis was conducted. A published algorithm was used to adjust overall survival estimates from trials of GM-CSF, dacarbazine, and gp100 for heterogeneity in baseline prognostic factors. Survival estimates were compared in three patient groups: stage IIIB-IV M1c, stage IIIB-IV M1a, and stage IV M1b/c. RESULTS: One trial of GM-CSF, four of dacarbazine, and one of gp100 were included in the analysis. After adjusting for differences in baseline prognostic factors, median overall survival (OS) in all patient groups was longer for those receiving GM-CSF than for those receiving dacarbazine or gp100. The observed survival over time for GM-CSF was similar to the adjusted survival for dacarbazine and greater than for gp100 in all patient groups. CONCLUSION: The relative treatment effect of GM-CSF, dacarbazine, and gp100 has been reliably estimated by adjusting for differences in baseline prognostic factors. Results suggest that OS with GM-CSF is at least as good as with dacarbazine and greater than with gp100. Given the role of these agents as controls in phase 3 trials of new immunotherapies and targeted agents, these results can be used to contextualize the efficacy of newer therapies. FUNDING: Amgen Inc.

Estimating Long-Term Survival of Adults with Philadelphia Chromosome-Negative Relapsed/Refractory B-Precursor Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treated with Blinatumomab Using Historical Data.

INTRODUCTION: Blinatumomab is a bispecific T cell-engaging antibody construct indicated for adult patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) Ph(-) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), an aggressive disease with poor prognosis. A phase 2 single-arm clinical study showed that 43% of patients achieved CR/CRh within two cycles and approximately 20% of patients receiving blinatumomab were still alive after 2 years. METHODS: The objective of the current analysis was to estimate long-term survival of patients receiving blinatumomab beyond the observed time period in the clinical study using a large historical observational dataset. Conditional survival probabilities of blinatumomab-treated patients beyond month 60 were assumed to be the same as the US general population. RESULTS: At month 60, the estimated proportion of blinatumomab-treated patients alive was more than double that of historical patients (12.6% vs 5.4%). The mean overall survival was 76.1 months for blinatumomab patients and 39.8 months for historical patients. Sensitivity analyses including additional follow-up data from the clinical study showed consistent results. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that blinatumomab provides substantial overall survival benefit to patients with (R/R) Ph(-) B-precursor ALL compared with salvage chemotherapy. FUNDING: Amgen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01466179 and NCT02003612.

Economic burden of toxicities associated with treating metastatic melanoma in eight countries.

BACKGROUND: Information on costs of managing adverse events (AEs) associated with current treatments in metastatic melanoma is limited. This study estimates costs of AEs in eight countries: Australia (AU), Canada (CA), France (FR), Germany (GE), Italy (IT), the Netherlands (NL), Spain (ES), and the UK. METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify grade 3/4 AEs from product label, published trials, conference abstracts, and treatment guidelines. Resource utilization for the management of each type of AE was determined via interviews with 5 melanoma clinicians in each country. Outpatient and inpatient costs were estimated for each type of AE using country-specific tariffs or government/published sources. RESULTS: In outpatient settings, the most costly AEs per incident included cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) (€1063, £720; NL/UK), anemia (€1443, €1329, €1285; ES/IT/FR), peripheral neuropathy (€1289; ES), and immune-related diarrhea (AUS$1,121; AU). In inpatient settings, the most costly AEs per hospitalization included hypophysitis (€10,265; €5316; CAN$9735; AUS$7231: ES/FR/CA/AU), dyspnea (€9077; GE), elevated liver enzymes (€6913, CAN$8030, AUS$6594; FR/CA/AU), CSCC (CAN$8934; CA), peripheral neuropathy (€6977, €4144, CAN$9472; NL/ES/CA), and diarrhea (£4284, €4113; UK/ES). CONCLUSIONS: Costs of managing AEs can be significant, and thus effective treatments with lower rates of severe AEs would be valuable.

Economic Burden of Toxicities Associated with Treating Metastatic Melanoma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Little has been reported on the costs of managing the adverse events (AEs) associated with current therapies for patients with regional or distant metastatic melanoma. OBJECTIVES: To identify treatment-related AEs in patients with metastatic melanoma and to estimate the associated costs of treating these AEs in the United States. METHODS: A cost-estimation study for AEs associated with treatment of metastatic melanoma was conducted from 2012 to 2013 by identifying grades 3 and 4 AEs through the use of a comprehensive search of drug labels and English-language, published phase 2/3 studies in PubMed, conference abstracts, and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Resource utilization for the management of each type of AE in the outpatient setting was obtained via interviews with 5 melanoma specialists in the United States. Unit costs for an AE associated with melanoma treatment in the outpatient setting were assigned using Medicare reimbursement rates to obtain these costs. Hospitalization and length-of-stay costs were estimated for each associated AE using the large national claims database Optum Clinformatics Data Mart for the period of July 1, 2004, to November 30, 2012. RESULTS: The most common AEs associated with chemotherapies used for melanoma were neutropenia, vomiting, and anemia. The most common AEs associated with vemurafenib were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma or keratoacanthoma, rash, and elevated liver enzymes; the most common AEs associated with dabrafenib were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma and pyrexia. Trametinib was most often associated with hypertension and rash. The most common AEs with ipilimumab were immune-related diarrhea or colitis, dyspnea, anemia, vomiting, and, less frequently, hypophysitis. The most common grade 3/4 AE with talimogene laherparepvec was cellulitis. The highest treatment costs for an AE in the outpatient setting were for neutropenia ($2092), headache ($609), and peripheral neuropathy ($539). The highest mean inpatient costs for an AE were for acute myocardial infarction, sepsis, and coma, which ranged from $31,682 to $47,069. Colitis or diarrhea, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, thrombocytopenia, hyponatremia, oliguria or anuria, hypertension, anemia, and elevated liver enzymes were associated with mean costs for hospitalization ranging from $19,122 to $26,861. CONCLUSION: The costs of managing treatment-related AEs in patients with metastatic melanoma are substantial. Effective treatments with improved safety profiles may help to reduce these costs. Until real-world evidence for the costs associated with treatment toxicity is available in the outpatient and inpatient settings, the costs estimated in this study can help inform decision makers about the cost-effectiveness of managing patients with metastatic melanoma.

Healthcare burden and reimbursement of hospitalization during chemotherapy for adults with Ph-negative relapsed or refractory B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia in France: a retrospective chart review.

OBJECTIVE: Philadelphia chromosome negative [Ph(-)] relapsed or refractory (R/R) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is an extremely rare condition requiring intensive treatment. This retrospective chart review aimed to quantify hospitalizations and reimbursement in this patient population in France. METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years and with at least one hospitalization for Ph(-) R/R B-precursor ALL were included in the study. They were relapsed with first remission lasting <12 months, relapsed after first salvage therapy, relapsed any time after hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), or were refractory to initial or salvage therapy. Data were collected from the index date (first diagnosis of R/R ALL) until death or loss to follow-up. The chemotherapy period was defined as the first chemotherapy date after the index date to the earliest of death, loss to follow-up, last chemotherapy dose plus 30 days, or initiation of HSCT. The primary outcome was the percentage of time hospitalized during the chemotherapy period. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included, with a mean age of 49 years. The mean proportion of time spent in the hospital during the chemotherapy period was 46% (95% CI =34-57%). Patients had a mean of 2.2 (SD =1.5) inpatient hospitalizations and the mean length of stay per hospitalization was 16.8 (SD =14.8) days. During the chemotherapy period, the mean amount reimbursed per hospitalization was €31 067 (SD = €4850) and the total hospitalization reimbursement per patient was €68 344. From the index date to death, excluding HSCT, the total reimbursement per patient was €108 873. LIMITATIONS: The sample size was small, although this was expected given the rarity of the patient population. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with Ph(-) R/R B-precursor ALL had repeated and prolonged hospitalizations during salvage chemotherapy. Approximately half the follow-up period was spent in the hospital, and this time was associated with high economic burden in France.

Cost-effectiveness of adding carfilzomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed multiple myeloma from a US perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the economic value of carfilzomib (Kyprolis), this study developed the Kyprolis Global Economic Model (K-GEM), which examined from a United States (US) payer perspective the cost-effectiveness of carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRd) versus lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM; 1-3 prior therapies) based on results from the phase III ASPIRE trial that directly compared these regimens. METHODS: A partitioned survival model that included three health states of progression-free (on or off treatment), post-progression, and death was developed. Using ASPIRE data, the effect of treatment regimens as administered in the trial was assessed for progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). Treatment effects were estimated with parametric regression models adjusting for baseline patient characteristics and applied over a lifetime horizon. US Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (1984-2014) registry data were matched to ASPIRE patients to extrapolate OS beyond the trial. Estimated survival was adjusted to account for utilities across health states. The K-GEM considered the total direct costs (pharmacy/medical) of care for patients treated with KRd and Rd. RESULTS: KRd was estimated to be more effective compared to Rd, providing 1.99 life year and 1.67 quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains over the modeled horizon. KRd-treated patients incurred $179,393 in total additional costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $107,520 per QALY. LIMITATIONS: Extrapolated survival functions present the greatest uncertainty in the modeled results. Utilities were derived from a combination of sources and assumed to reflect how US patients value their health state. CONCLUSIONS: The K-GEM showed KRd is cost-effective, with an ICER of $107,520 per QALY gained against Rd for the treatment of patients with RMM (1-3 prior therapies) at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000. Reimbursement of KRd for patients with RMM may represent an efficient allocation of the healthcare budget.

Economic Analysis of Panitumumab Compared With Cetuximab in Patients With Wild-type KRAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer That Progressed After Standard Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti-epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT. FINDINGS: The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab. IMPLICATIONS: These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377.

Indirect Treatment Comparison of Talimogene Laherparepvec Compared with Ipilimumab and Vemurafenib for the Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Few randomized controlled trials have compared new treatments for metastatic melanoma. We sought to examine the relative treatment effect of talimogene laherparepvec compared with ipilimumab and vemurafenib. METHODS: A systematic literature review of treatments for metastatic melanoma was undertaken but a valid network of evidence could not be established because of a lack of comparative data or studies with sufficient common comparators. A conventional adjusted indirect treatment comparison via network meta-analysis was, therefore, not feasible. Instead, a meta-analysis of absolute efficacy was undertaken, adjusting overall survival (OS) data for differences in prognostic factors between studies using a published algorithm. RESULTS: Four trials were included in the final indirect treatment comparison: two of ipilimumab, one of vemurafenib, and one of talimogene laherparepvec. Median OS for ipilimumab and vemurafenib increased significantly when adjustment was applied, demonstrating that variation in disease and patient characteristics was biasing OS estimates; adjusting for this made the survival data more comparable. For both ipilimumab and vemurafenib, the adjustments improved Kaplan-Meier OS curves; the observed talimogene laherparepvec OS curve remained above the adjusted OS curves for ipilimumab and vemurafenib, showing that long-term survival could differ from the observed medians. CONCLUSION: Even with limited data, talimogene laherparepvec, ipilimumab, and vemurafenib could be compared following adjustments, thereby providing a more reliable understanding of the relative effect of treatment on survival in a more comparable patient population. The results of this analysis suggest that OS with talimogene laherparepvec is at least as good as with ipilimumab and vemurafenib and improvement was more pronounced in patients with no bone, brain, lung or other visceral metastases. FUNDING: Amgen Inc.

Estimating healthcare resource use associated with the treatment of metastatic melanoma in eight countries.

Objectives Studies reporting healthcare resourse use (HRU) for melanoma, one of the most costly cancers to treat, are limited. Using consistent, robust methodology, this study estimated HRU associated with the treatment of metastatic melanoma in eight countries. Methods Using published literature and clinician input, treatment phases were identified: active systemic treatment (pre-progression); disease progression; best supportive care (BSC)/palliative care; and terminal care. HRU elements were identified for each phase and estimates of the magnitude and frequency of use in clinical practice were obtained through country-specific Delphi panels, comprising healthcare professionals with experience in oncology (n = 8). Results Medical oncologists are the key care providers for patients with metastatic melanoma, although in Germany dermato-oncologists also lead care. During the active systemic treatment phase, each patient was estimated to require 0.83-2 consultations with a medical oncologist/month across countries; the median number of such assessments in 3 months was highest in Canada (range = 3.5-5) and lowest in France, the Netherlands and Spain (1). Resource use during the disease progression phase was intensive and similar across countries: all patients were estimated to consult with medical oncologists and 10-40% with a radiation oncologist; up to 40% were estimated to require a brain MRI scan. During the BSC/palliative care phase, all patients were estimated to consult with medical oncologists, and most to consult with a primary care physician (40-100%). Limitations Panelists were from centers of excellence, thus results may not reflect care within smaller hospitals; data obtained from experts may be less variable than data from broader clinical practice. Treatments for metastatic melanoma are continually emerging, thus some elements of our work could be superseded. Conclusions HRU estimates were substantial and varied across countries for some resources. These data could be used with country-specific costs to elucidate costs for the management of metastatic melanoma.

Use Patterns and Costs of Isolated Limb Perfusion and Infusion in the Treatment of Regional Metastatic Melanoma: A Retrospective Database Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Isolated limb perfusion and infusion (ILP/ILI) are therapies for regional metastatic melanoma that allow high doses of anticancer drugs to be delivered directly into the circulation of an affected limb, thereby minimizing systemic drug toxicity. This procedure can lead to high response rates and is recommended in patients with Stage III unresectable metastatic melanoma. However, limited information is available on patterns of use and costs. This study examined patterns of ILP/ILI use and associated costs in patients with melanoma in the United States (US). METHODS: Retrospective, observational study, using administrative claims data from the MarketScan(®) databases, was performed in patients with a diagnosis of melanoma (ICD-9-CM: 172.xx, V10.82) who underwent ILP/ILI (CPT-4: 36823) between January 1, 2002 and March 31, 2013. Patient characteristics, use patterns, length of hospital stay, and costs (per 2014 US $) of ILP/ILI were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and thirteen patients met the study criteria and were included in the analysis. Mean age was 61.4 years (standard deviation [SD] 13.8) and 38.9% of patients were male; the mean baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index was 0.19; 34.5% of patients were Medicare beneficiaries. The majority of patients (87.6%) had melanoma of the lower limb, 11.5% of the upper limb, and 0.9% of both limbs; 60.2% had lymph node metastasis and 56.6% had skin metastasis. Four patients (3.5%) underwent multiple ILP/ILI. The mean (± SD) length of hospital stay was 5.6 (± 3.5) days and the mean (± SD) cost was US$36,758 (± 27,124) per ILP/ILI procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Isolated limb perfusion and infusion in patients with melanoma were associated with long hospital stays and high costs. These results provide useful source data for the economic evaluation of treatment options for regional metastatic melanoma. FUNDING: This study was funded by Amgen, Inc.

Q-TWiST analysis of panitumumab plus FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 alone in patients with previously untreated wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Panitumumab plus infusional 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) significantly improved overall survival versus FOLFOX4 alone in patients with previously untreated wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We applied a quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) analysis to provide an integrated measure of clinical benefit, with the objective of comparing quality-adjusted survival between the two arms. We acknowledge that there are limitations associated with Q-TWIST methodology for crossover trials. METHODS: For each treatment arm, the truncated mean times spent in the toxicity (TOX: grade 3 or 4 adverse events), time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (TWiST), and relapse (REL: after disease progression) states were estimated by the product-limit method, and adjusted using utility weights derived from patient-reported EuroQol 5-dimension measures. Sensitivity analyses were performed in which utility weights (varying from 0 to 1) were applied to time in the TOX and REL health states. RESULTS: Quality-adjusted overall survival time was statistically significantly longer with panitumumab plus FOLFOX4 (20.5 months) than with FOLFOX4 alone (18.2 months) (P = 0.025). CONCLUSION: In patients with previously untreated wild-type RAS mCRC, panitumumab plus FOLFOX4 significantly improved quality-adjusted survival compared with FOLFOX4 alone.

Years of life lost due to metastatic melanoma in 12 countries.

BACKGROUND: Regionally or distantly metastatic melanoma (stages IIIB/C and IV) place a high burden on society. To quantify this burden, this study estimated years of life lost (YLL) per patient for adults with metastatic melanoma in 12 countries in 2014. METHODS: General population growth and life expectancy were estimated from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development data and life tables for each country. Incidence of melanoma and mortality rates for the disease were based on GLOBOCAN and US registry data. The prevalence of metastatic melanoma was calculated using mortality rates and survival data from patients with melanoma. YLL per patient was estimated by the difference between the disease-free life expectancy and the life expectancy with metastatic melanoma. RESULTS: YLL per patient were as follows: Australia, men = 19.9 years, women = 22.7 years; Brazil, 16.3, 19.8; Canada, 19.4, 22.3; France, 18.8, 23.1; Germany, 18.3, 20.8; Italy, 19.3, 22.7; Mexico, 17.2, 19.0; the Netherlands, 18.5, 21.5; Spain, 19.2, 23.1; Sweden 19.4, 22.0; the UK, 18.7, 21.2; and the US, 17.9, 20.6. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of metastatic melanoma as measured by YLL is substantial in all 12 countries; although there is variation across countries and between men and women.

Population preference values for health states in relapsed or refractory B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: To date, reliable and comprehensive health-related quality of life data for patients with relapsed or refractory B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have not been collected in clinical trials of the disease, and no utility studies have been published. The purpose of this study was to define and validate health states experienced by adults with relapsed/refractory B-precursor ALL, and to assign utility values to these health states using time-trade off methodology. METHODS: This study was conducted in the UK in three phases. In the first phase, five health state descriptions were developed based on a recent clinical trial. The second phase validated the health state descriptions with clinicians and patients with experience of relapsed/refractory B-precursor ALL. The third phase involved prospective health state valuation using time-trade off methodology in a sample of the general public. The study was approved by the UK National Health Service Research Ethics Committee. RESULTS: In total, 123 participants were recruited and included in the final analysis; all participants gave written, informed consent. Complete remission was the most preferred health state (mean utility [SEM], 0.86 [0.01]), followed by complete remission with partial hematological recovery (with minimal risk of bleeding or developing infection) (0.75 [0.02]); aplastic bone marrow (0.59 [0.02]); partial remission (0.50 [0.03]); and progressive disease (0.30 [0.04]). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to report utility values for health states associated with relapsed/refractory B-precursor ALL. It was designed and conducted to align with NICE guidance on alternative methods for generating health state utility values when EQ-5D data are either unavailable or inappropriate. These utilities can be applied in future cost-effectiveness analyses of treatment for relapsed/refractory B-precursor ALL.

Management and treatment of relapsed or refractory Ph(-) B-precursor ALL: a web-based, double-blind survey of EU clinicians.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis for adult patients with Ph(-) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) who are refractory to treatment or experience relapse (R/R), is poor; over 90% of these patients die from the disease, typically within a few months. While there are some national guidelines published for the treatment of adult patients with ALL, and local working group recommendations do exist, there is very little detail and no preferred treatment regimens for adult patients with R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. The aim of this study was to describe current real-world clinical practice in Europe for the management and treatment of adult R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. METHODS: A web-based, double-blind survey was conducted in November/December 2013 in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. The survey was developed following consultation with specialist clinicians and a critical review of published literature. Eligible clinicians (15 per country) were board-certified in haemato-oncology or haematology; had at least 4 years of experience in their current role and had treated at least five patients with adult ALL in the 36 months before the survey, including at least one with R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. RESULTS: Clinicians across the five countries consulted 16 guidelines and local working group recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. Thirty three regimens for salvage therapy were reported; the most frequently cited was augmented hyper-CVAD (15%), with vincristine the most commonly used agent. Salvage therapy regimens involved a range of agents, and most respondents reported using at least one cytotoxic agent; across respondents 10 different cytotoxic agents were cited. All respondents reported that toxicity was common for the regimens they used to treat R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence of current management and treatment patterns of R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL in the real-world clinical practice in Europe. The approach to the treatment of R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL is heterogeneous, reflecting the lack of any clearly superior chemotherapeutic option, thus it appears that clinicians are trying a wide variety of therapies. These findings show a clear need for effective, tolerable treatments for R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL.

Cost-minimization analysis of panitumumab compared with cetuximab for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of first-line treatment with panitumumab + FOLFOX in comparison to cetuximab + FOLFIRI among patients with wild-type (WT) RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the US. METHODS: A cost-minimization model was developed assuming similar treatment efficacy between both regimens. The model estimated the costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration frequency (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions. Average anti-EGFR doses were calculated from the ASPECCT clinical trial, and average doses of chemotherapy regimens were based on product labels. Using the medical component of the consumer price index, adverse event costs were inflated to 2014 US dollars, and all other costs were reported in 2014 US dollars. The time horizon for the model was based on average first-line progression-free survival of a WT RAS patient, estimated from parametric survival analyses of PRIME clinical trial data. RESULTS: Relative to cetuximab + FOLFIRI in the first-line treatment of WT RAS mCRC, the cost-minimization model demonstrated lower projected drug acquisition, administration, and adverse event costs for patients who received panitumumab + FOLFOX. The overall cost per patient for first-line treatment was $179,219 for panitumumab + FOLFOX vs $202,344 for cetuximab + FOLFIRI, resulting in a per-patient saving of $23,125 (11.4%) in favor of panitumumab + FOLFOX. CONCLUSIONS: From a value perspective, the cost-minimization model supports panitumumab + FOLFOX instead of cetuximab + FOLFIRI as the preferred first-line treatment of WT RAS mCRC patients requiring systemic therapy.

Overall survival in patients with metastatic melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with regionally or distantly metastatic melanoma have poor long-term prognosis. The objective of this analysis was to describe survival rates among patients diagnosed with unresectable stage IIIB/C or stage IV melanoma. METHODS: Using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, patients diagnosed with unresectable stage IIIB/C and stage IV (M1a, M1b, M1c) melanoma between 2004 and 2009 were selected. Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics were reported at the time of diagnosis. The outcome of the analysis was time from melanoma diagnosis to death. Survival was presented as 1 year, 2 year, and 3 year survival rates, and median overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 1682 patients met the study criteria, with 4.4% at stage IIIB/IIIC, 12.6% at M1a, 17.4% at M1b, and 65.6% at M1c. The mean age was 64 years, 49.5% of patients were 64 years old or younger, 68.0% were male, and 91.7% were white. Patients at stage IIIB/IIIC had a median overall survival (OS) of 24.3 months, with a survival rate of 67.2% at 1 year, 42.9% at 2 years, and 32.1% at 3 years. For patients at stage M1a, the median OS was 22.3 months, 1 year, 2 year, and 3 year survival rates were 64.5%, 40.4%, and 26.4%, respectively; for patients at stage M1b, median OS was 11.2 months, 1 year, 2 year, and 3 year survival rates were 43.8%, 23.4%, and 13.8%, respectively; for patients at stage M1c, median OS was 5.1 months, and 1 year, 2 year, and 3 year survival rates were 22.3%, 8.9%, and 4.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients diagnosed with unresectable metastatic melanoma from 2004 to 2009, patients at later stages had lower median overall survival and higher mortality rates than patients at earlier stages. Limitations of this analysis include the lack of information on disease progression, therapies used, and genetic factors.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin) compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). DESIGN: A semi-Markov model was constructed from a French health collective perspective, with health states related to first-line treatment (progression-free), disease progression with and without subsequent active treatment, resection of metastases, disease-free after successful resection and death. METHODS: Parametric survival analyses of patient-level progression-free and overall survival data from the only head-to-head clinical trial of panitumumab and bevacizumab (PEAK) were performed to estimate transitions to disease progression and death. Additional data from PEAK informed the amount of each drug consumed, duration of therapy, subsequent therapy use, and toxicities related to mCRC treatment. Literature and French public data sources were used to estimate unit costs associated with treatment and duration of subsequent active therapies. Utility weights were calculated from patient-level data from panitumumab trials in the first-, second- and third-line settings. A life-time perspective was applied. Scenario, one-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Based on a head-to-head clinical trial that demonstrates better efficacy outcomes for patients with wild-type RAS mCRC who receive panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6, the incremental cost per life-year gained was estimated to be €26,918, and the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was estimated to be €36,577. Sensitivity analyses indicate the model is robust to alternative parameters and assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental cost per QALY gained indicates that panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 represents good value for money in comparison to bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 and, with a willingness-to-pay ranging from €40,000 to €60,000, can be considered cost-effective in first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC.