Analysis of cost-effectiveness of chemotherapeutic agents and new therapies for the management of unresectable and metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: The advent of targeted therapies and immunotherapies has revolutionized metastatic melanoma (MM) management but their use is associated with high daily costs compared to chemotherapies: €2 for dacarbazine versus €175 for immunotherapies and €413 for targeted therapies. While overall survival (OS) has increased, healthcare expenditures are expected to double by 2030. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to estimate the median OS and costs for MM patients in order to evaluate the effectiveness of new biological or targeted therapies (NT) used since 2013 compared to chemotherapies. MATERIALS & METHODS: This was a retrospective monocentric cost-effectiveness analysis performed in CHU Nantes (Nantes University Hospital). All MM patients treated with conventional chemotherapy as first-line treatment between 2008 and 2012 were included (CHEMO group). The same number of patients treated with NT as first-line between 2013 and 2017 were included (NT group). RESULTS: In total, 161 patients were included in each group. The mean age at diagnosis was 64.7±2.4 years in the CHEMO group and 65.3±2.4 years in the NT group (not significant). The men/women ratio was 1.48 and 1.27, respectively, (not significant). The median OS was 158 days in the CHEMO group and 395 days in the NT group (p<0.001). Treatment cost was €10,280/patient versus €94,676/patient, respectively. The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €90,184/LY (95% CI: €59,637; €166,395). CONCLUSION: Our study assessed clinical and economic features associated with MM management before and after the advent of NT. Costs and life expectancy have increased. NT appears to be cost-effective.

SMABcare study: subcutaneous monoclonal antibody in cancer care: cost-consequence analysis of subcutaneous rituximab in patients with follicular lymphoma.

Rituximab is used as a standard of care for follicular lymphoma and is usually administered intravenously. A novel subcutaneous formulation recently showed non-inferior efficacy with similar pharmacokinetic and safety profiles compared to intravenous rituximab in patients with follicular lymphoma. This new approach is promising in terms of comfort for patients and time-saving for hospital staff. To evaluate the real-life economic impact of subcutaneous rituximab as maintenance therapy in patients with follicular lymphoma in real life, we conducted a cost-consequence analysis from the hospital's point of view in three French teaching hospitals. Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L) was investigated as well as patients' and nurses' perception. Compared to intravenous rituximab, subcutaneous administration showed an estimated cost-saving of €109.20 per patient per cycle (p < 0.001), 78.6% of which could be attributed to the rituximab cost. Health-related quality of life showed no significant difference between the two groups despite tendencies for greater pain in the subcutaneous group and greater anxiety in the intravenous group. Thus, subcutaneous rituximab had a favorable pharmacoeconomic profile, with clinical efficacy similar to that of intravenous rituximab. The subcutaneous form was preferred by almost all patients, but further consideration should be given to improve the patients' experience: a dedicated day unit with trained medical, nursing, and pharmaceutical staff could be helpful.