Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab versus surveillance for the adjuvant treatment of patients with urothelial carcinoma who are at high risk of recurrence: a US payer perspective.

AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant nivolumab compared with surveillance for the treatment of patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (MIUC) after radical resection from a US healthcare payer perspective and to investigate the impact of alternative modeling approaches on the cost-effectiveness results. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A four-state, semi-Markov model consisting of disease free, local recurrence, distant recurrence, and death health states was developed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab compared with surveillance over a 30-year time horizon. The model used data from the randomized CheckMate 274 trial (NCT02632409) and published literature to inform transitions among health states, and inputs on cost, utility, adverse event, and disease management. Scenario analyses were conducted to investigate the impact of model structure and key assumptions on the results. One-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to investigate the robustness of the results. RESULTS: Total expected costs were higher with nivolumab ($162,278) compared with surveillance ($63,027). Nivolumab was associated with improved survival (1.61 life-years gained compared with surveillance) and an incremental gain of 0.98 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Although total treatment costs were higher for nivolumab, cost offsets were observed because of delayed or avoided recurrences and deaths experienced with nivolumab compared with observation. The incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios were $61,462/life-year and $100,930/QALY. LIMITATIONS: At the time of analysis, CheckMate 274 had limited follow-up on disease-free survival and no overall survival data. The limited evidence necessitated assumptions on modeling survival after each type of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab is estimated to be a life-extending and cost-effective option for adjuvant treatment of MIUC for patients who are at high risk of recurrence after undergoing radical resection in the United States. Using a threshold of $150,000/QALY, the cost-effectiveness conclusions remained consistent across the scenario and sensitivity analyses conducted.

Challenges, considerations, and approaches for developing a cost-effectiveness model for the adjuvant treatment of muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma: with a spotlight on nivolumab versus placebo.

AIMS: To present alternative approaches related to both structural assumptions and data sources for the development of a decision analytic model for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant nivolumab compared with surveillance in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (MIUC) after radical resection. METHODS AND RESULTS: Alternative approaches related to both structural assumptions and data sources are presented to address challenges and data gaps, as well as discussion of strengths and limitations of each approach. Specifically, challenges and considerations related to the following are presented: (1) selection of a modeling approach (partitioned survival model or state transition model) given the available evidence, (2) choice of health state structure (three- or four-state) to model disease progression and subsequent therapy, (3) modeling of outcomes from subsequent therapy using tunnel states to account for time-dependent transition probabilities or absorbing health states with one-off costs and outcomes applied, and (4) methods for modeling health-state transitions in a setting where treatment has curative intent and available survival data are immature. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple considerations must be taken into account when developing an economic model for new, emerging oncology treatments in early lines of therapy, all of which can affect the model's overall ability to estimate (quality-adjusted) survival benefits over a lifetime horizon. This paper identifies a series of key structural and analytic considerations regarding modeling of nivolumab treatment in the adjuvant MIUC setting. Several alternative approaches with regard to structure and data have been included in a flexible cost-effectiveness model so the impact of the alternative approaches on model results can be explored. The impact of these alternative approaches on cost-effectiveness results are presented in a companion article. Our findings may also help inform the development of future models for other treatments and settings in early-stage cancer.

Safety and effectiveness of apixaban compared with warfarin among clinically-relevant subgroups of venous thromboembolism patients in the United States Medicare population.

BACKGROUND: The AMPLIFY trial found significantly lower major bleeding (MB) and similar recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) risks associated with apixaban vs warfarin among patients with VTE. OBJECTIVES: To compare MB, clinically-relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding, and recurrent VTE risks among clinically-relevant subgroups of newly diagnosed elderly patients with VTE prescribed apixaban vs warfarin. METHODS: US Medicare patients prescribed apixaban or warfarin within 30 days post-VTE encounter were identified. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to control for patient characteristics. Cox models were used to assess MB, CRNM bleeding, and recurrent VTE. Subgroup analyses were conducted for index VTE encounter type, index VTE diagnosis type, index VTE etiology, sex, and frailty. RESULTS: Post-PSM, 11,363 matched pairs of patients prescribed apixaban or warfarin were identified. Apixaban had lower MB (Hazard Ratio [HR]:0.76; 95% CI:0.64-0.91) and similar recurrent VTE risks (HR:1.04; 95% CI:0.75-1.43) vs warfarin. No significant interactions were observed between treatment and index VTE encounter type, index VTE diagnosis type, or sex for risk of MB, CRNM bleeding, or recurrent VTE. Significant interactions: frail patients prescribed apixaban had a 15% lower, while non-frail patients prescribed apixaban had 32% lower CRNM bleeding risk vs those prescribed warfarin. Patients with provoked VTE prescribed apixaban trended toward a higher, while those with unprovoked VTE trended toward a lower risk of recurrent VTE vs patients prescribed warfarin. CONCLUSIONS: Apixaban was associated with significantly lower risks of MB and CRNM bleeding, and similar risk of recurrent VTE as compared with warfarin across the overall population and most subgroups.

Correction to: Real-World Recurrence Rates and Economic Burden in Patients with Resected Early-Stage Melanoma.

The presentation of the numbers of patients in Tables 1 and 3 was adjusted.

Real-World Recurrence Rates and Economic Burden in Patients with Resected Early-Stage Melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world data on recurrence and economic burden in patients with resected early-stage melanoma are limited. The objective of this study was to assess real-world recurrence rates, risk factors for recurrence, and costs of recurrence in patients with resected stage IIB, IIC, or IIIA melanoma in the USA. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included patients with resected stage IIB, IIC, or IIIA melanoma (American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual, seventh edition) in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program-Medicare database of the National Cancer Institute. Recurrence rates and healthcare costs (2018 USD) after recurrence were assessed. RESULTS: Two-year recurrence rates for stages IIB, IIC, and IIIA melanoma were 29, 44, and 46%, respectively. In patients with stage IIB or IIC disease, the odds of recurrence were significantly higher in those aged > 75 years [odds ratio (OR) 1.853, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.416, 2.425], with ulceration (OR 1.771; 95% CI 1.293, 2.425), or with a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR 1.244; 95% CI 1.129, 1.372); however, the odds of recurrence were significantly lower in those with T3 staging (OR 0.522; 95% CI 0.393, 0.695). In those with stage IIIA melanoma, superficial spreading was associated with significantly lower odds of recurrence (OR 0.178; 95% CI 0.053, 0.601). Following recurrence, mean healthcare costs at 1 year were $31,870 for patients with stage IIB or IIC melanoma and $29,224 for those with stage IIIA melanoma. CONCLUSION: The SEER data show that a substantial proportion of adults with early-stage melanoma experience a recurrence within 2 years following resection, resulting in a significant economic burden to the US healthcare system. Dermatologists can distinguish patients with resected early-stage melanoma who are at a high risk for recurrence and consider referrals to medical oncologists for approved adjuvant therapy or enrollment in clinical trials after surgical resection to reduce the recurrence of melanoma.

Safety, effectiveness, and health care cost comparisons among elderly patients with venous thromboembolism prescribed warfarin or apixaban in the United States Medicare population.

Objective: To compare safety, effectiveness, and healthcare costs of major bleeding (MB), clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), and all-cause hospitalization among elderly Medicare VTE patients prescribed warfarin vs apixaban.Methods: Using 100% Medicare data, elderly patients prescribed apixaban or warfarin within 30 days after a VTE encounter were identified. Patients had continuous health plan enrollment and no parenteral or oral anticoagulant use ≤6 months preceding the VTE encounter. Cohorts were balanced using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the risk of MB, CRNM bleeding, recurrent VTE, and all-cause hospitalization. Generalized linear and two-part models were used to estimate MB-, recurrent VTE-, and all-cause related costs (per patient per month [PPPM]).Results: In the pre-matched cohort, 25,284 (66.9%) patients were prescribed warfarin and 12,515 (33.1%) apixaban. After 1:1 PSM, 11,363 matched pairs of apixaban-warfarin patients were included for a mean follow-up of 4.0 and 4.4 months, respectively. Matched cohorts had a mean age of 78 years and mean Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 2.9. Warfarin was associated with a higher risk of MB (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10-1.57) and CRNM bleeding (HR = 1.31; 95% CI = 1.19-1.43) vs apixaban. The risks of recurrent VTE (HR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.70-1.33) and all-cause hospitalization (HR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.99-1.12) were similar among warfarin and apixaban patients. Warfarin patients had higher MB-related ($147 vs $75; p = .003) and all-cause costs PPPM ($3,267 vs $3,033; p < .001), but similar recurrent VTE-related medical costs PPPM ($30 vs $36; p = .516) vs apixaban patients.Conclusions: Warfarin was associated with significantly higher risk of MB and CRNM bleeding as well as higher MB-related and all-cause costs vs apixaban patients. Recurrent VTE risk and costs were similar among warfarin and apixaban patients.