Burden of Illness and Treatment Patterns in Second-line Large B-cell Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: This study examined real-world treatment patterns with curative intent, adverse events, and health care resource utilization and costs in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) to understand the unmet medical need in the United States. METHODS: Adult patients with ≥2 LBCL diagnoses between January 1, 2012, and March 31, 2019, were identified (index date was the date of the earliest LBCL diagnosis) from MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. Patients had ≥1 claim for any LBCL treatment, ≥6 months of data before (baseline) and ≥12 months of data after (follow-up period) the index date, and no baseline LBCL diagnosis. Treatment patterns, adverse events, and all-cause and LBCL-related health care resource utilization and costs were examined. All patients had received first-line therapy of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone with or without rituximab; etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin hydrochloride with or without rituximab; or regimens with anthracycline and second-line therapy with stem cell transplant (SCT)-intended intensive therapy or platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients who received an SCT-intended second-line regimen or received an SCT regardless of second-line regimen were considered SCT eligible. FINDINGS: A total of 188 patients met the criteria of eligibility for SCT. Among the 119 patients who received a second-line regimen intended for SCT, only 22.7% received an SCT. Patients eligible for SCT started first-line therapy within 1 month of their LBCL index date, and the mean duration of first-line therapy was 4.1 months. The mean gap in therapy between first- and second-line therapy was 6.6 months, and the mean duration of second-line therapy was 3.0 months. During the second-line therapy treatment window (mean duration with SCT, 12.4 months; mean duration without SCT, 4.8 months), the most common regimens for patients eligible for SCT were ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide with or without rituximab and gemcitabine and oxaliplatin with or without rituximab; the top 4 most common treatment-related adverse events were febrile neutropenia (56.4%), anemia (49.5%), thrombocytopenia (42.6%), and nausea and vomiting (36.2%), which were similar regardless of receipt of SCT; mean (SD) per-patient-per-month all-cause costs were $46,174 ($49,057) for patients with SCT and $45,780 ($52,813) for patients without SCT. IMPLICATIONS: Treatment patterns among patients with relapsed or refractory LBCL eligible for SCT were highly varied. Only 22.7% of patients who received an SCT-preparative regimen ultimately received SCT, which highlights the magnitude of unmet needs in this population. The occurrence of treatment-related adverse events was similar regardless of SCT status. Per-patient-per-month all-cause costs were also similar with upfront SCT costs averaged during a longer follow-up.

Burden of illness and outcomes in second-line large B-cell lymphoma treatment: real-world analysis of Medicare beneficiaries.

Aims: To characterize elderly large B-cell lymphoma patients who progress to second-line treatment to identify potential unmet treatment needs. Patients & methods: Retrospective USA cohort study, patients receiving second-line autologous stem cell transplant (SCT) preparative regimen ('ASCT-intended') versus those who did not; stratified further into those who received a stem cell transplant and those who did not. Primary outcomes were: healthcare resource utilization, costs and adverse events. Results: 1045 patients (22.0%) were included in the ASCT-intended group, 23.3% of whom received SCT (5.1% of entire second-line population). Non-SCT patients were older and had more comorbidities and generally higher rates of healthcare resource utilization and costs. Conclusion: Elderly second-line large B-cell lymphoma patients incurred substantial costs and a minority received potentially curative SCT, suggesting significant unmet need.

Lay abstract Large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) is an aggressive form of cancer. Although chemotherapy is often initially successful, LBCL recurs in about 50% of patients. For many years, the standard of care for recurrent LBCL has been a course of strong chemotherapy followed by stem cell transplant (SCT). However, many older patients cannot tolerate or do not respond well to chemotherapy and therefore cannot proceed to SCT. In this real-world study of Medicare patients, we found that only 5.1% of patients with recurrent LBCL ever received potentially curative SCT. They also had higher healthcare costs than similar patients who did receive SCT. This shows a significant unmet need in elderly LBCL patients that may potentially be addressed with recent treatment innovations.

Estimating Long-Term Survival for Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma Treated with Chimeric Antigen Receptor Therapy: A Comparison of Standard and Mixture Cure Models.

Patients treated with anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies have shown either sustained remission or rapid progression. Traditional survival modeling may underestimate outcomes in these situations, by assuming the same mortality rate for all patients. To illustrate this issue, we compare standard parametric models to mixture cure models for estimating long-term overall survival in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel). Compared to standard models without cure proportions, mixture cure models have similar fit, but substantially different extrapolated survival. Standard models (Weibull and generalized gamma) estimate mean survival of 2.0 years (95% CI (1.5, 3.0)) and 3.0 years (95% CI (1.7, 5.6)), respectively, compared to 15.7 years (95% CI (9.3, 21.1)) and 17.5 yrs (12.0, 22.8) from mixture cure models (using Weibull and generalized gamme distributions). For cancer therapies where substantial fractions achieve long term remission, our results suggest that assumptions of the modeling approach should be considered. Given sufficient follow-up, mixture cure models may provide a more accurate estimate of long-term overall survival compared with standard models.

Cost-effectiveness of axicabtagene ciloleucel for adult patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma in the United States.

PURPOSE: Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) was recently approved for treatment of relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) following two or more prior therapies. As the first CAR T-cell therapy available for adults in the US, there are important questions about clinical and economic value. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of axi-cel compared to salvage chemotherapy using a decision model and a US payer perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision model was developed to estimate life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and lifetime cost for adult patients with R/R LBCL treated with axi-cel vs salvage chemotherapy (R-DHAP). Patient-level analyses of the ZUMA-1 and SCHOLAR-1 studies were used to inform the model and to estimate the proportion achieving long-term survival. Drug and procedure costs were derived from US average sales prices and Medicare reimbursement schedules. Future healthcare costs in long-term remission was derived from per capita Medicare spending. Utility values were derived from patient-level data from ZUMA-1 and external literature. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses evaluated uncertainty. Outcomes were calculated over a lifetime horizon and were discounted at 3% per year. RESULTS: In the base case, LYs, QALYs, and lifetime costs were 9.5, 7.7, and $552,921 for axi-cel vs 2.6, 1.1, and $172,737 for salvage chemotherapy, respectively. The axi-cel cost per QALY gained was $58,146. Cost-effectiveness was most sensitive to the fraction achieving long-term remission, discount rate, and axi-cel price. The likelihood that axi-cel is cost-effective was 95% at a willingness to pay of $100,000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: Axi-cel is a potentially cost-effective alternative to salvage chemotherapy for adults with R/R LBCL. Long-term follow-up is necessary to reduce uncertainties about health outcomes.