Cost-effectiveness of serplulimab as first-line therapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in China.

Objective: The ASTRUM-005 trial demonstrated that adding serplulimab to chemotherapy significantly prolonged the survival of patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC), but also increased the risk of adverse events. Given the high cost of serplulimab compared to chemotherapy, this study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of serplulimab plus chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for extensive-stage SCLC from the perspective of China's healthcare system. Methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate the disease process of extensive-stage SCLC and estimate the health outcomes and direct medical costs of patients. Scenario analyses, univariate sensitivity analyses, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of different parameters on model uncertainty. The primary model outcomes included costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: Compared to placebo plus chemotherapy, serplulimab plus chemotherapy resulted in an additional 0.25 life-years and 0.15 QALYs, but also increased costs by $26,402, resulting in an ICER of 179,161 USD/QALY. Sensitivity analysis showed that the ICER was most sensitive to the cost of serplulimab, and the probability that serplulimab was cost-effective when added to chemotherapy was only 0 at the willingness-to-pay threshold of 37,423 USD/QALY. Scenario analysis revealed that price discounts on serplulimab could increase its probability of being cost-effective. Conclusion: Serplulimab plus chemotherapy is not a cost-effective strategy for first-line treatment of extensive-stage SCLC in China. Price discounts on serplulimab can enhance its cost-effectiveness.

Durvalumab consolidation therapy in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer after concurrent chemoradiation: a China-based cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab in post-chemoradiotherapy patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. METHODS: The study developed a five-health state Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab consolidation therapy in post-chemoradiotherapy patients based on the PACIFIC clinical trial. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to evaluate the model uncertainty. RESULTS: Durvalumab consolidation therapy provided an additional 1.22 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with an incremental cost of $24,397 compared to no consolidation therapy in unselected patients. Durvalumab consolidation therapy was cost-effective as it yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $20,000 per QALY gained at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $31,494 per QALY. In the patient subgroup with PD-L1-expressing tumors (≥1%), durvalumab was associated with an ICER of $33,058/QALY, resulting in a slight skewing away from the given cost-effectiveness threshold. The sensitivity analysis showed that ICERs were most sensitive to the cost of durvalumab, the cost of pembrolizumab, and the body weight of patients, regardless of PD-L1 expression selection. CONCLUSION: Durvalumab consolidation therapy is likely to be cost-effective in China, which indicates that expensive immunotherapies can gain clinical benefits at a justifiable cost in developing countries as well.

Economic Evaluation of First-Line Camrelizumab for Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer in China.

Background: As the first domestic PD-1 antibody approved for lung cancer in China, camrelizumab has exhibited proven effectiveness for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. However, the cost-effectiveness of this new regimen remains to be investigated. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab combination therapy vs. chemotherapy for previously untreated patients with advanced, non-squamous NSCLC without Alk or Egfr genomic aberrations from the perspective of China's healthcare system. Methods: Based on the CameL trial, the study developed a three-health state Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding camrelizumab to chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone in NSCLC patients. The analysis models were conducted for patients unselected by PD-L1 tumor expression (the base case) and the patient subgroup with PD-L1-expressing tumors (≥1%). Primary model outcomes included the costs in US dollars and health outcomes in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) as well as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) under a willingness-to-pay threshold of $31,500 per QALY. Additionally, a scenario analysis that adjusted within-trial crossover was employed to evaluate camrelizumab combination therapy compared to chemotherapy without subsequent use of PD1/PD-L1 antibodies. Results: Camrelizumab combination therapy was more costly and provided additional 0.11 QALYs over chemotherapy in the base case analysis (0.86 vs. 0.75 QALYs), 0.12 QALYs over chemotherapy in the subgroup analysis (0.99 vs. 0.88 QALYs), and 0.34 QALYs over chemotherapy in the scenario analysis (0.86 vs. 0.52 QALYs). Correspondingly, the ICER was $63,080 per QALY, $46,311 per QALY, and $30,591 per QALY, in the base case, the subgroup, and the scenario analysis, respectively. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that ICERs of the base case and the subgroup analysis were most sensitive to the cost of camrelizumab, the cost of pemetrexed. Besides, the base case and subgroup analysis were more sensitive to the risk of neutrophil count decreased in the camrelizumab and the utility of stable disease, respectively. Conclusion: Although camrelizumab combination therapy is not cost-effective as first-line therapy for NSCLC patients in China in the base case, adjusting within-trial crossover would move the treatment regimen toward cost-effectiveness in the scenario analysis.

First-line atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis from China.

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel-based chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the Chinese healthcare system perspective.Methods: A Markov model was developed based on the IMpower130 clinical trial. Drug costs and health state utility were obtained from the literature. Outcomes included life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the model uncertainty.Results: When compared to chemotherapy alone, atezolizumab plus chemotherapy provides an additional 0.34 LY and 0.19 QALY, and has an ICER of $180,560.15 per additional LY gained and that of $325,328.71 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the results were most sensitive to changes in atezolizumab cost. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that there was a 0% probability that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy was cost-effective at willingness-to-pay values of $30,828 per QALY. If the WTP threshold increased to $325,000 per QALY, atezolizumab plus chemotherapy has a 50% chance to be cost-effective.Conclusions: From the Chinese healthcare system perspective, atezolizumab combination is not cost-effective for first-line therapy of advanced non-squamous NSCLC.