Development and validation of a decision model for the evaluation of novel lung cancer treatments in the Netherlands.

Recent discoveries in molecular diagnostics and drug treatments have improved the treatment of patients with advanced (inoperable) non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from solely platinum-based chemotherapy to more personalized treatment, including targeted therapies and immunotherapies. However, these improvements come at considerable costs, highlighting the need to assess their cost-effectiveness in order to optimize lung cancer care. Traditionally, cost-effectiveness models for the evaluation of new lung cancer treatments were based on the findings of the randomized control trials (RCTs). However, the strict RCT inclusion criteria make RCT patients not representative of patients in the real-world. Patients in RCTs have a better prognosis than patients in a real-world setting. Therefore, in this study, we developed and validated a diagnosis-treatment decision model for patients with advanced (inoperable) non-squamous NSCLC based on real-world data in the Netherlands. The model is a patient-level microsimulation model implemented as discrete event simulation with five health events. Patients are simulated from diagnosis to death, including at most three treatment lines. The base-model (non-personalized strategy) was populated using real-world data of patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy between 2008 and 2014 in one of six Dutch teaching hospitals. To simulate personalized care, molecular tumor characteristics were incorporated in the model based on the literature. The impact of novel targeted treatments and immunotherapies was included based on published RCTs. To validate the model, we compared survival under a personalized treatment strategy with observed real-world survival. This model can be used for health-care evaluation of personalized treatment for patients with advanced (inoperable) NSCLC in the Netherlands.

Cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands in different age groups.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands. METHODS: A Markov model was used to evaluate the health effects and costs of lung cancer screening from the healthcare perspective. The effects and costs of ten screening scenarios with different start and stop ages of screening were examined across a lifetime horizon in a cohort of 100,000 smokers and ex- smokers 50 years and older. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years, 50-70 years, and 50 years and older are below the cost-effectiveness threshold of € 20,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Screening 50-60-year-old smokers and ex-smokers was the most cost-effective scenario with an ICER of € 14,094 per QALY gained. However, screening smokers and ex-smokers 50 years and older yielded the highest QALYs and resulted in an ICER of € 16,594 per QALY, which is below the threshold of € 20,000 per QALY. All screening scenarios compared to no screening resulted in CERs between the € 14,000 and € 16,000 per QALY gained. The efficiency frontier showed that screening smokers and ex-smokers in the age groups 70 years and older, 60-70 years, 60 years and older are excluded by extended dominance by no screening, screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years and 50-70 years. CONCLUSION: This study showed that lung cancer screening is cost-effective in the Netherlands.

Trends in Drug Costs and Overall Survival in Patients with Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in The Netherlands Diagnosed from 2008 Through 2014.

BACKGROUND: The Value-Based Health Care concept defines patient value as patient-relevant outcomes divided by costs. The aim of the present study was to assess the development of systemic treatment costs over the years compared with changes in overall survival (OS) at the level of a diagnosis of stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: All patients diagnosed (in 2008-2014) with stage IV NSCLC and treated with systemic treatment in six Dutch large teaching hospitals (Santeon network) were included. We collected data on OS and amounts of drug units (milligrams) for every drug in the applied systemic cancer treatments, until death. These amounts were multiplied by Dutch unit costs (Euros/mg) expressed in 2018 Euros to construct total drug costs per line of treatment per patient. Costs for day care visits were added for drugs requiring parenteral administration. RESULTS: Data were collected from 1214 patients. Median OS and mean total drug costs showed no significant variation over the years (p = 0.437 and p = 0.693, respectively). Mean total drug costs per 1 year of survival ranged from €20,665 to €26,438 during the period under study. Costs for first-line systemic treatment were significantly higher in 2011-2014 compared with 2008-2010. CONCLUSION: This study shows that overall drug costs were stable over the years, despite a relative increase in first-line treatment costs. Median OS remained at around 8 months from year to year. These trend data are very relevant as background for the assessment of costs and achieved outcomes in the more recent years.

Quantitative and qualitative assessment of real world data comparative effectiveness research of systemic therapies in lung oncology: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: The growing interest in comparative effectiveness research (CER) based on data from routine clinical practice also extends towards lung oncology. Although CER studies using real world data (RWD) have the potential to assist clinical decision-making, concerns about the quality and validity of studies with observational data subsist. The primary objective of the present study is to assess the current status of observational CER in the field of lung oncology, both quantitatively as qualitatively. METHODS: We performed a systematic electronic literature database search in MEDLINE and EMBASE (up to 1 July 2015). The quality of all selected studies was assessed according to the Good ReseArch for Comparative Effectiveness (GRACE) checklist. RESULTS: The first selection included 657 publications. After screening the corresponding abstracts and full-text papers, 38 studies remained. A total of 36 studies included patients with advanced NSCLC. The comparison of the effectiveness of gefitinib versus erlotinib was the main objective in 22% of the studies. The median number of patients per study was 202 (range 21-10064). The number of publications increased over the years whereas the quality score remained stable over the years with several common shortcomings (checklist items M5, D1, D4, D6). DISCUSSION: The growing interest in clinical oncology CER studies using RWD is reflected in an increasing number of publications in the recent years. The studies have several common methodological shortcomings possibly limiting their applicability in clinical decision-making. To fulfil the promise of RWD CER in lung oncology effort should be continued to overcome these shortcomings.

Microbial aetiology, outcomes, and costs of hospitalisation for community-acquired pneumonia; an observational analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcome and especially costs of hospitalisation for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in relation to microbial aetiology. This knowledge is indispensable to estimate cost-effectiveness of new strategies aiming to prevent and/or improve clinical outcome of CAP. METHODS: We performed our observational analysis in a cohort of 505 patients hospitalised with confirmed CAP between 2004 and 2010. Hospital administrative databases were extracted for all resource utilisation on a patient level. Resource items were grouped in seven categories: general ward nursing, nursing on ICU, clinical chemistry laboratory tests, microbiology exams, radiology exams, medication drugs, and other.linear regression analyses were conducted to identify variables predicting costs of hospitalisation for CAP. RESULTS: Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most identified causative pathogen (25%), followed by Coxiella burnetii (6%) and Haemophilus influenzae (5%). Overall median length of hospital stay was 8.5 days, in-hospital mortality rate was 4.8%.Total median hospital costs per patient were €3,899 (IQR 2,911-5,684). General ward nursing costs represented the largest share (57%), followed by nursing on the intensive care unit (16%) and diagnostic microbiological tests (9%). In multivariate regression analysis, class IV-V Pneumonia Severity Index (indicative for severe disease), Staphylococcus aureus, or Streptococcus pneumonia as causative pathogen, were independent cost driving factors. Coxiella burnetii was a cost-limiting factor. CONCLUSIONS: Median costs of hospitalisation for CAP are almost €4,000 per patient. Nursing costs are the main cause of these costs.. Apart from prevention, low-cost interventions aimed at reducing length of hospital stay therefore will most likely be cost-effective.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) I/D corrected serum ACE activity and severity assessment of community-acquired pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Various studies have described decreased serum angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) activity in patients with pneumonia. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the role of ACE in pneumonia by comparing ACE insertion/deletion (I/D) genotype corrected serum ACE activity and to establish whether the severity of the disease correlates with lower ACE activity. METHODS: This was a prospective hospital-based observational study including 134 patients with pneumonia. Serum ACE activity was determined at admission, on days 2, 3, 5 and 10 of hospital stay, and at recovery. Based on ACE genotype and reference values, corresponding Z-scores were calculated. Disease severity, quantified by the acute physiology score (APS), and clinical outcome were compared between tertile groups of the Z-scores. RESULTS: A significant decrease in serum ACE activity during an episode of pneumonia with return to control range during recovery was observed for all three genotypes (II, ID and DD). The calculated Z-scores showed a negative correlation with APS scores (p=0.050). No significant association between decreased serum ACE activity and clinical outcome was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Serum ACE activity is significantly decreased during the acute phase of pneumonia. Despite correction for ACE I/D genotype, decreased ACE activity did not show a prognostic value. Further studies are needed to examine the mechanisms behind and diagnostic value of decreased ACE activity in community-acquired pneumonia.