Cost-effectiveness of second-line axicabtagene ciloleucel in relapsed refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

The ZUMA-7 (Efficacy of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel Compared to Standard of Care Therapy in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma) study showed that axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) improved event-free survival (EFS) compared with standard of care (SOC) salvage chemoimmunotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant in primary refractory/early relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); this led to its recent US Food and Drug Administration approval in this setting. We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US adults (mean age, 65 years) with primary refractory/early relapsed DLBCL by developing a Markov model (lifetime horizon) to model the cost-effectiveness of second-line axi-cel compared with SOC using a range of plausible long-term outcomes. EFS and OS were estimated from ZUMA-7. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming a 5-year EFS of 35% with second-line axi-cel and 10% with SOC, axi-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $150 000 per QALY ($93 547 per QALY). axi-cel was no longer cost-effective if its 5-year EFS was ≤26.4% or if it cost more than $972 061 at a WTP of $150 000. Second-line axi-cel was the cost-effective strategy in 73% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo iterations at a WTP of $150 000. If the absolute benefit in EFS is maintained over time, second-line axi-cel for aggressive relapsed/refractory DLBCL is cost-effective compared with SOC at a WTP of $150 000 per QALY. However, its cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on long-term outcomes. Routine use of second-line chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy would add significantly to health care expenditures in the United States (more than $1 billion each year), even when used in a high-risk subpopulation. Further reductions in the cost of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy are needed to be affordable in many regions of the world.

Cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin combined with chemoimmunotherapy in untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

In patients with treatment-naive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the POLARIX study (A Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Polatuzumab Vedotin With Rituximab-Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, and Prednisone [R-CHP] Versus Rituximab-Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone [R-CHOP] in Participants With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma) reported a 6.5% improvement in the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS), with no difference in overall survival (OS) or safety using polatuzumab vedotin, rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (pola-R-CHP) compared with standard rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP for DLBCL. We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US adults (mean age, 65 years) with treatment-naive DLBCL by developing a Markov model (lifetime horizon) to model the cost-effectiveness of pola-R-CHP and R-CHOP using a range of plausible long-term outcomes. Progression rates and OS were estimated from POLARIX. Outcome measures were reported in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming a 5-year PFS of 69.6% with pola-R-CHP and 62.7% with R-CHOP, pola-R-CHP was cost-effective at a WTP of $150 000 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $84 308/QALY). pola-R-CHP was no longer cost-effective if its 5-year PFS was 66.1% or lower. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that pola-R-CHP is cost-effective up to a cost of $276 312 at a WTP of $150 000. pola-R-CHP was the cost-effective strategy in 56.6% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo iterations at a WTP of $150 000. If the absolute benefit in PFS is maintained over time, pola-R-CHP is cost-effective compared with R-CHOP at a WTP of $150 000/QALY. However, its cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on its long-term outcomes and costs of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. Routine usage of pola-R-CHP would add significantly to health care expenditures. Price reductions or identification of subgroups that have maximal benefit would improve cost-effectiveness.

Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy.

Patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) cancers have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. The recent approval of 2 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) autologous T-cell products for R/R B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma treatment is setting the stage for what is possible in other diseases. However, there are important factors that must be considered, including patient selection, toxicity management, and costs associated with CAR T-cell therapy. To begin to address these issues, NCCN organized a task force consisting of a multidisciplinary panel of experts in oncology, cancer center administration, and health policy, which met for the first time in March 2018. This report describes the current state of CAR T-cell therapy and future strategies that should be considered as the application of this novel immunotherapy expands and evolves.

Value, Access, and Cost of Cancer Care Delivery at Academic Cancer Centers.

Key challenges facing the oncology community today include access to appropriate, high quality, patient-centered cancer care; defining and delivering high-value care; and rising costs. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network convened a Work Group composed of NCCN Member Institution cancer center directors and their delegates to examine the challenges of access, high costs, and defining and demonstrating value at the academic cancer centers. The group identified key challenges and possible solutions to addressing these issues. The findings and recommendations of the Work Group were then presented at the Value, Access, and Cost of Cancer Care Policy Summit in September 2015 and multi-stakeholder roundtable panel discussions explored these findings and recommendations along with additional items.

Outcome of patients treated with a single-fraction dose of palliative radiation for cutaneous T-cell lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) is a radiosensitive tumor. Presently, treatment with radiation is given in multiple fractions. The current literature lacks data that support single-fraction treatment for CTCL. This retrospective review assesses the clinical response in patients treated with a single fraction of radiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study reviewed the records of 58 patients with CTCL, primarily mycosis fungoides, treated with a single fraction of palliative radiation therapy (RT) between October 1991 and January 2011. Patient and tumor characteristics were reviewed. Response rates were compared using Fisher's exact test and multiple logistic regressions. Survival rates were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to assess the cost of a single vs a multifractionated treatment regimen. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy individual lesions were treated, with the majority (97%) treated with ≥ 700 cGy; mean follow-up was 41.3 months (range, 3-180 months). Response rate by lesion was assessed, with a complete response (CR) in 255 (94.4%) lesions, a partial response in 10 (3.7%) lesions, a partial response converted to a CR after a second treatment in 4 (1.5%) lesions, and no response in 1 (0.4%) lesion. The CR in lower extremity lesions was lower than in other sites (P=.0016). Lesions treated with photons had lower CR than those treated with electrons (P=.017). Patients with lesions exhibiting large cell transformation and tumor morphology had lower CR (P=.04 and P=.035, respectively). Immunophenotype did not impact response rate (P=.23). Overall survival was significantly lower for patients with Sézary syndrome (P=.0003) and erythroderma (P<.0001). The cost of multifractionated radiation was >200% higher than that for single-fraction radiation. CONCLUSIONS: A single fraction of 700 cGy-800 cGy provides excellent palliation for CTCL lesions and is cost effective and convenient for the patient.

In vitro assessment of nucleoside analogs in multiple myeloma.

PURPOSE: To identify nucleoside analogs that may be effective for multiple myeloma (MM), we tested fludarabine, clofarabine, arabinosylguanine, cytarabine, troxacitabine, and gemcitabine in MM cell lines. METHODS: We employed biologic and biochemical assays in MM cell lines to evaluate the clinical potential of these nucleoside analogs. RESULTS: Among these purine and pyrimidine nucleoside analogs, fludarabine, clofarabine and gemcitabine were the most potent. MM cell lines, resistant to commonly used chemotherapeutic agents for this disease, were more sensitive to gemcitabine with an IC50 in the nanomolar range. The greater cytotoxicity of gemcitabine in MM cells was consistent with greater accumulation of gemcitabine triphosphate, the major cytotoxic metabolite of this drug. MM.1S cells accumulated >100 microM gemcitabine triphosphate but accumulated <20 microM of the other analogs as the respective triphosphates. In addition incubation with gemcitabine resulted in inhibition of DNA synthesis. Incubation with 25, 50 or 100 nM gemcitabine resulted in a dose- and time-dependent increase in the cell population with a subG1 DNA content indicative of apoptosis. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that gemcitabine is a potent nucleoside analog in MM cell lines including cell types resistant to other chemotherapeutic agents. The greater activity of gemcitabine compared to other analogs seems to be due to favorable metabolism of this agent.