Cost-effectiveness of ensartinib, crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib and lorlatinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer in China.

Objective: Six anaplastic lymphoma kinase-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (ALK-TKIs), including one domestic (ensartinib) and five imported ALK-TKIs (crizotinib, ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib), have been recommended as first-line treatments for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC in China. This study sought to examine the cost-effectiveness of these six novel therapies in Chinese patients. Material and methods: We constructed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of the six ALK-TKIs as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Transition probabilities were estimated by synthesizing data from the PROFILE 1,029 trial and a network meta-analysis. Health state utilities and costs were sourced from published literature, publicly available national databases, and local general hospitals. The robustness of model was assessed via deterministic sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: Compared with crizotinib, ensartinib achieved additional 0.12 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) with marginal costs of $3,249, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $27,553/ QALY. When compared with ceritinib and brigatinib, ensartinib achieved additional 0.06 and 0.03 QALYs with substantially reduced costs. When compared with lorlatinib and alectinib, ensartinib was associated with a lower QALY and decreased total costs; the ICERs for lorlatinib and alectinib were $934,101/ QALY and $164,888/ QALY, respectively. Conclusion: For Chinese patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, ensartinib was a cost-effective option compared with crizotinib, and was a dominant alternative to ceritinib and brigatinib. Although lorlatinib and alectinib were associated with prolonged survival compared with ensartinib, they were less cost-effective than ensartinib due to the overwhelming total costs.

Cost-effectiveness of ensartinib for patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in China.

Background: Crizotinib and ensartinib improved survival in patients with ALK arrangement non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, the economic outcomes of using ensartinib versus crizotinib are still unclear. Aim: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ensartinib versus crizotinib for ALK-positive NSCLC patients from the perspective of China's healthcare system. Methods: A partitioned survival model with three health states (stable, progressive and death) was developed. Survival data were obtained from published eXalt3 clinical trials of ensartinib verses crizotinib for patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Parametric models were used to extrapolate outcomes beyond the trial period. The drug cost comes from the local drug procurement platform. Other costs and utility values were obtained from published literature, and one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out to determine the robustness of the model outcomes. Results: In the whole life cycle, the average annual cost of ensatinib was US$77,636.63, and utility value was 5.5 quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Patients receiving crizotinib had 3.315QALYs and US$32,935.88 costs over the same time horizon. The incremental cost utility ratio is US$19,810.55/QALYs. In 2021, the per capita GDP of China is US$12,721.33, and the incremental cost utility is lower than the threshold of willingness to pay US$38,163.99. Conclusion: Compared with crizotinib, ensatinib is economical in the treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC and should be promoted.

Cost Effectiveness of Ribociclib and Palbociclib in the Second-Line Treatment of Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer in Post-Menopausal Indian Women.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we evaluate the cost and outcomes of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) plus fulvestrant, fulvestrant alone, and conventional chemotherapy as the second-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in India. METHODS: Using a Markov model, the clinical effectiveness of managing HR+, HER2- MBC in postmenopausal women with either a CDK4/6i (either ribociclib or palbociclib) and fulvestrant, fulvestrant alone, and chemotherapy (single-agent paclitaxel or capecitabine) was measured in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The costs were estimated from two different points of view: scenario I, as per the prevailing market prices of the drugs; and scenario II, as per the reimbursement rates set up by the publicly financed national health insurance scheme. Incremental cost per QALY gained with a given treatment option was compared against the next best alternative and was assessed for cost effectiveness using a threshold of 1-time the per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in India from a societal perspective. RESULTS: In scenario I, an MBC patient was found to incur a lifetime cost of Indian Rupees (₹) 2.54 million ($34,644), ₹2.53 million ($34,496), ₹512,598 ($6,984), ₹326,026 ($4,442) and ₹237,115 ($3,230) for the ribociclib and palbociclib combination arms, fulvestrant monotherapy, single-agent paclitaxel and the single-agent capecitabine treatment arms, respectively. The lifetime cost for CDK4/6i (ribociclib and palbociclib) combination therapy, fulvestrant monotherapy, paclitaxel, and capecitabine arms was estimated to be ₹1.94 million ($26,459), ₹1.92 million ($26,220), ₹315,387 ($4,296), ₹187,392 ($2,553) and ₹153,263 ($2,088), respectively, in scenario II. The mean QALYs lived per MBC patient with CDK4/6i (either ribociclib or palbociclib) combination therapy, fulvestrant, paclitaxel and capecitabine were estimated to be 1.4, 1.0, 0.9 and 0.7, respectively. None of the treatment arms are cost effective at current prices and reimbursement rates at a threshold of 1-time the per capita GDP of India. However, a 78% reduction in the current market price or a 72% reduction in the reimbursement rate of fulvestrant in the government-funded insurance program will make it a cost-effective treatment option for HR+, HER2- MBC patients in India. CONCLUSION: CDK4/6i (ribociclib and palbociclib) therapy is not a cost-effective treatment option for MBC patients. A 72% reduction in the reimbursement rate for fulvestrant monotherapy will make it a cost-effective treatment option in the Indian context.

Assessment of cytochrome P450 3A4-mediated drug-drug interactions for ipatasertib using a fit-for-purpose physiologically based pharmacokinetic model.

PURPOSE: Ipatasertib, a potent and highly selective small-molecule inhibitor of AKT, is currently under investigation for treatment of cancer. Ipatasertib is a substrate and a time-dependent inhibitor of CYP3A4. It exhibits non-linear pharmacokinetics at subclinical doses in the clinical dose escalation study. To assess the DDI risk of ipatasertib at the intended clinical dose of 400 mg with CYP3A4 inhibitors, inducers, and substrates, a fit-for-purpose physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model of ipatasertib was developed. METHODS: The PBPK model was constructed in Simcyp using in silico, in vitro, and clinical data and was optimized and verified using clinical data. RESULTS: The PBPK model described non-linear pharmacokinetics of ipatasertib and captured the magnitude of the observed clinical DDIs. Following repeated doses of 400 mg ipatasertib once daily (QD), the PBPK model predicted a 3.3-fold increase of ipatasertib exposure with itraconazole; a 2-2.5-fold increase with moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors, erythromycin and diltiazem; and no change with a weak CYP3A4 inhibitor, fluvoxamine. Additionally, in the presence of strong or moderate CYP3A4 inducers, rifampicin and efavirenz, ipatasertib exposures were predicted to decrease by 86% and 74%, respectively. As a perpetrator, the model predicted that ipatasertib (400 mg) caused a 1.7-fold increase in midazolam exposure. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the value of using a fit-for-purpose PBPK model to assess the clinical DDIs for ipatasertib and to provide dosing strategies for the concurrent use of other CYP3A4 perpetrators or victims.

Pfizer and Palbociclib in China: Analyzing an Oncology Pay-for-Performance Plan.

OBJECTIVES: China is poised to become the world's second-largest oncology drug market. Its ability to continue broadening health coverage is in question. Institutional innovations such as performance-based risk-sharing agreements (PBRSAs) have been developed to promote access to novel therapeutics beyond that provided by public health insurance and central procurement systems. We examine in depth the financial implications of a PBRSA developed in China for the breast cancer drug palbociclib. METHODS: We generated a 2-state Markov model from PBRSA information made publicly available. Model inputs included breast cancer outcomes data from the published literature. The primary analysis estimates the percentage reduction in overall drug expenditures due to the PBRSA. Sensitivity analyses explored the financial impact of varied computed tomography scan utilization, rebate rate, and rebate duration. RESULTS: Estimated palbociclib expenditures for the PBRSA cohort totaled $36 278 000. Based on the publicly available information for the PBRSA, an effective discount of 1.3% was estimated. The effective discount was insensitive to changes in computed tomography scan utilization. CONCLUSIONS: The palbociclib PBRSA likely had negligible impact on patient access to therapy and limited downstream financial impact to patients and payers. The short duration of the rebate window, small rebate, and disease indolence contributed to the low expected rebate percentage.

Assessment of the intracavernosal injection platelet-rich plasma in addition to daily oral tadalafil intake in diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction non-responding to on-demand oral PDE5 inhibitors.

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ICI of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in addition to daily oral tadalafil intake in diabetic erectile dysfunction (ED) patients non-responding to PDE5 inhibitors. Overall, 48 patients complaining of ED non-responding to on-demand PDE5 inhibitors were allocated into 2 equal groups, diabetics and non-diabetics that were given a daily dose of 5 mg tadalafil plus vardenafil 20 mg on demand during the study besides being subjected to 3 doses of ICI of PRP, 4 weeks apart. Responses to on-demand PDE5 inhibitors, International index of erectile function-5 (IIEF-5) score, erection hardness scores (EHS) and pharmaco-dynamic duplex studies were assessed. After PRP injections, 33% and 50% of cases were satisfied with on-demand PDE5 inhibitors, respectively, whereas 41% and 66% of them showed improved EHS response. Compared with baseline scores, the mean IIEF-5 scores were significantly improved after PRP therapy in the diabetic ED group (12.1 vs. 8.04, p = 0.003) as well as in the non-diabetic ED group (14.8 vs. 10.2, p = 0.001) linked to pharmaco-penile duplex readings. Both good and fair diabetic control exhibited significant responses to ICI therapy of PRP compared with bad controlled cases. The significant improvement included; the IIEF-5 score increase (86.7%, 126% vs. 16.1%), improved EHS as well as penile duplex readings. Baseline HbA1C demonstrated a significant negative correlation with IIEF-5 score before (p = 0.019) and after PRP therapy (p = 0.002) respectively. It could be concluded that ICI of PRP could be an effective therapy for treating ED patients non-responding to on-demand oral PDE5 treatment.

Assessment In Vitro of the Antimalarial and Transmission-Blocking Activities of Cipargamin and Ganaplacide in Artemisinin-Resistant Plasmodium falciparum.

Artemisinin resistance in Plasmodium falciparum has emerged and spread widely in the Greater Mekong Subregion, threatening current first-line artemisinin combination treatments. New antimalarial drugs are needed urgently. Cipargamin (KAE609) and ganaplacide (KAF156) are promising novel antimalarial compounds in advanced stages of development. Both compounds have potent asexual blood stage activities, inhibit P. falciparum gametocytogenesis, and reduce oocyst development in anopheline mosquitoes. In this study, we compared the asexual and sexual stage activities of cipargamin, ganaplacide, and artesunate in artemisinin-resistant P. falciparum isolates (n = 6; K13 mutations C580Y, G449A, and R539T) from Thailand and Cambodia. Asexual blood stage antimalarial activity was evaluated in a SYBR-green I-based 72-h in vitro assay, and the effects on male and female mature stage V gametocytes were assessed in the P. falciparum dual gamete formation assay. Ganaplacide had higher activities than cipargamin and artesunate, with mean (standard deviation [SD]) 50% inhibitory concentrations (IC50s) against asexual stages of 5.6 (1.2) nM and 6.9 (3.8) nM for male gametocytes and 47.5 (54.7) nM for female gametocytes. Cipargamin had a similar potency against male and female gametocytes, with mean (SD) IC50s of 115.6 (66.9) nM for male gametocytes, 104.9 (84.3) nM for female gametocytes, and 2.4 (0.7) nM for asexual stages. Both cipargamin and ganaplacide showed significant transmission-blocking activities against artemisinin-resistant P. falciparum in vitro.

Olaparib as first line in BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian carcinoma: Is it cost-effective in Spain?

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of olaparib after being funded by the Spanish National Health Service (SNHS) as first-line monotherapy maintenance treatment in patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) and BRCA mutations in Spain. METHODS: A semi-Markov model with one-month cycles was adapted to the Spanish healthcare setting, using the perspective of the SNHS, and a time horizon of 50 years. Two scenarios were compared: receiving olaparib vs. no maintenance treatment. The model comprised four health states and included the clinical results of the SOLO1 study, along with the direct healthcare costs associated with the use of first-line and subsequent treatment resources (2020 €). A discount rate of 3% was applied for future cost and quality-of-life outcomes. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was also carried out and a cost-effectiveness threshold of €25,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) was considered. RESULTS: The introduction of olaparib as a first-line maintenance treatment for advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations implied a cost of €131,614.98 compared to €102,369.54 without olaparib (difference: €29,245.44), with an improvement of 2.00 QALYs (5.56 and 3.57, respectively). Therefore, olaparib is cost-effective for advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €14,653.2/QALY. The results from the PSA showed that 92.1% of the simulations fell below the €25,000/QALY threshold. The model showed that olaparib could improve the overall survival by 2 years, vs. no maintenance treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib as first-line maintenance treatment is cost-effective in advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations in Spain.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of olaparib and niraparib as maintenance therapy for women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of olaparib and niraparib as maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.Methods: A decision analysis model compared the costs and effectiveness of olaparib and niraparib versus placebo for patients with or without germline BRCA mutations. Resource use and associated costs were estimated from the 2020 National Health Insurance Administration reimbursement price list. Clinical effectiveness was measured in progression-free survival per life-years (PFS-LY) based on the results of clinical trials SOLO2/ENHOT-Ov21 and ENGOT-OV16/NOVA. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated from a single-payer perspective. RESULTS: In the base case, olaparib was the more cost-effective treatment regimen. The ICERs for olaparib and niraparib compared to placebo were NT$1,804,785 and NT$2,340,265 per PFS-LY, respectively. Tornado analysis showed that PFS and the total resource use cost of niraparib regimen for patients without gBRCA were the most sensitive parameters impacting the ICER. The ICERs for both drugs in patients with a gBRCA mutation were lower than in patients without a gBRCA mutation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that olaparib was more cost-effective than niraparib at the willingness-to-pay threshold of NT$2,602,404 per PFS life-year gained. CONCLUSION: Olaparib was estimated to be less cost and more effective compared to niraparib as maintenance therapy for patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of dolutegravir-based antiretroviral regimens: an economic evaluation of a clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: HIV programmes world-wide currently make decisions regarding new antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens with less side-effects and higher resistance barriers, which may improve adherence and viral suppression. Economic evaluation helps inform these decisions. METHODS: We conducted an economic evaluation of three ART regimens included in the ADVANCE trial from the provider's perspective: tenofovir alafenamide (TAF)/emtricitabine (FTC)+dolutegravir (DTG) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/FTC+DTG, compared with TDF/FTC/efavirenz (EFV). We used top-down and bottom-up cost analysis with resource utilization based on trial data and adjusted to emulate routine care. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of each regimen as cost per person virally suppressed or retained and per life-year saved, at 48 and 96 weeks. RESULTS: Though the DTG-based trial arms were 2% more costly than TDF/FTC/EFV, both had slightly lower cost-per-outcome ($9783 and $9929/patient virally suppressed for TDF/FTC+DTG and TAF/FTC+DTG, respectively) than TDF/FTC/EFV ($10 365). The trial cost per additional virally suppressed patient, compared with TDF/FTC/EFV, was lower in the TDF/FTC+DTG arm ($2967) compared with TAF/FTC+DTG ($3430). In routine care, cost per virally suppressed patient was estimated as similar between TDF/FTC+DTG ($426) and TDF/FTC/EFV ($424) but more costly under TAF/FTC+DTG. Similar results were seen in the cost per additional person retained across scenarios. When modelled over 20 years, TDF/FTC+DTG was more cost-effective than TAF/FTC+DTG ($10 341 vs $41 958/life-year saved). CONCLUSION: TDF/FTC+DTG had similar costs per outcome as TDF/FTC/EFV in the routine care scenario but TDF/FTC+DTG was more cost-effective when modelled over 20 years.

In vitro assessment of the potential for dolutegravir to affect hepatic clearance of levonorgestrel.

OBJECTIVES: The World Health Organization recommends that all countries adopt dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy as the preferred regimen for all individuals living with HIV. Levonorgestrel is a commonly used hormonal contraceptive, which undergoes drug-drug interactions with some antiretrovirals, but the potential interaction between dolutegravir and levonorgestrel has not been examined. We aimed to evaluate cytochrome P450 (CYP)-mediated levonorgestrel metabolism and quantify the effects of dolutegravir on levonorgestrel apparent intrinsic clearance (CLint.app. ) and CYP gene expression. METHODS: In vitro CYP-mediated CLint.app. of levonorgestrel was quantified using a recombinant human CYP (rhCYP) enzyme system. A primary human hepatocyte model of drug metabolism was used to assess the effects of dolutegravir on (1) levonorgestrel CLint.app. , using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, and (2) the expression of specific CYP enzymes, using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Levonorgestrel clearance was mediated by multiple rhCYPs, including rhCYP3A4. Under control conditions, levonorgestrel CLint.app. was 22.4 ± 5.0 µL/min/106  hepatocytes. Incubation with 43.1 nM of unbound dolutegravir elevated levonorgestrel CLint.app. to 31.4 ± 7.8 µL/min/106  hepatocytes (P = 0.168), while 142.23 nM increased levonorgestrel CLint.app. to 37.0 ± 2.9 µL/min/106  hepatocytes (P = 0.012). Unbound dolutegravir ≥ 431 nM induced expression of CYP3A4 (≥ two-fold) in a dose-dependent manner, while 1.44 µM of unbound dolutegravir induced CYP2B6 expression 2.2 ± 0.3-fold (P = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, this in vitro study suggests that dolutegravir has the potential to increase hepatic clearance of levonorgestrel by inducing both CYP3A and non-CYP3A enzymes. The observed in vitro dolutegravir-levonorgestrel drug-drug interaction should be further examined in clinical studies.

Dolutegravir in Mexico for special populations: A cost analysis perspective.

Integrase strand-transfer inhibitors (INSTI) are the latest class of antiretrovirals registered in Mexico. They include raltegravir (RAL), elvitegravir/cobicistat (EVG/c), dolutegravir (DTG) and bictegravir (BIC). Along with international guidelines, Mexico adopted the use of INSTI about two years ago as initial antiretroviral therapy (ART). This is partially due to the increase in the pre-treatment resistance to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI), mainly efavirenz (EFV). Furthermore, INSTI depict greater efficacy, safety and less drug-drug interactions than NNRTI and protease inhibitors (PI). DTG is a second generation INSTI with a high barrier to resistance. It is recommended in international and national guidelines in a wide variety of clinical scenarios for persons living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PLWHIV), including treatment-naïve, first-line NNRTI treatment failure, simplification switch in suppressed patients, pregnancy, women with childbearing potential, adolescents and children over 6 years of age. DTG is mostly metabolized by the liver UDP-glucuronosyltransferase, and exhibits low drug-drug interactions overall; on the other hand, it has an extremely low renal elimination, therefore may be used in PLWHIV with advanced kidney disease without dose modification. Tuberculosis is a common coinfection in Mexico that requires rifampin-based anti-tuberculosis therapy, which requires increasing DTG to double dosing (50 mg BID). In Mexico, DTG-based regimens are likely to be cost-effective in many scenarios, given its acquisition costs and the particularities of the HIV population and associated clinical conditions, including a relatively high proportion of the following: i) new HIV diagnoses presenting at acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) stage; ii) high rate of tuberculosis coinfection; iii) frequent first-line NNRTI treatment failures; and iv) relatively high proportion of infected children and adolescents.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of dolutegravir/lamivudine for treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1) infection in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Dolutegravir(DTG)/lamivudine(3TC) is the first 2-drug regimen recommended as an initial treatment for people living with HIV (PLHIV). OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness and potential budget impact of DTG/3TC in the US healthcare setting. METHODS: A previously published hybrid decision-tree and Markov cohort state transition model was adapted to estimate the incremental costs and health outcome benefits over a patients' lifetime. DTG/3TC was compared with current standard of care in treatment naive and treatment experienced virologically suppressed PLHIV. Health states included in the model were based upon virologic response and CD4 cell count, with death as an absorbing state. Clinical data was informed by the Phase III GEMINI 1 and 2 clinical trials, a published network meta-analysis (NMA) in treatment-naive patients and the Phase III TANGO clinical trial in treatment experienced patients. Costs and utilities were informed by published data and discounted annually at a rate of 3%. A separate 5-year budget impact analysis was conducted assuming 5%-15% uptake in eligible treatment naive and 10%-30% uptake in eligible treatment experienced patients. RESULTS: In the treatment naive analyses based on GEMINI 1 and 2, DTG/3TC dominated, i.e., was less costly and more effective, than all comparators. DTG/3TC resulted in 0.083 incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at a cost saving of $199,166 compared with the DTG + tenofovir disoproxil(TDF)/emtricitabine(FTC) comparator arm. The incremental QALY and cost savings for DTG/3TC compared with DTG/abacavir(ABC)/3TC, cobicistat-boosted darunavir(DRV/c)/tenofovir alafenamide(TAF)/FTC, and bictegravir (BIC)/TAF/FTC, based on NMA results were 0.465, 0.142, and 0.698, and $42,948, $122,846, and $44,962, respectively. In the analyses of treatment-experienced virologically suppressed patients based on TANGO, DTG/3TC offered slightly lower QALYs (-0.037) with an estimated savings of $78,730 when compared with continuation of TAF-based regimen (TBR). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that these conclusions were relatively insensitive to alternative parameter estimates. The budget impact analysis estimated that by 5th year a total of 70,240 treatment naive patients and 1,340,480 treatment experienced patients could be eligible to be prescribed DTG/3TC. The estimated budget savings over 5 years ranged from $1.12b to $3.35b (corresponding to 27,512 to 82,536 on DTG/3TC by year 5) in the lowest and highest uptake scenarios, respectively. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, DTG/3TC with its comparable efficacy and lower drug acquisition costs, has the potential to offer significant cost savings to US healthcare payers for the initial treatment of treatment naive patients and as a treatment switching option for virologically suppressed patients. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded in full by ViiV healthcare, Brentford, UK. Medical writing to support this study was also funded in full by ViiV Healthcare, Brentford, UK. Butler, Hayward, and Jacob are employees of HEOR Ltd, the company performing this study funded by ViiV Healthcare. Anderson is an employee of GlaxoSmithKline and owns shares in the company. Punekar, Evitt, and Oglesby are employees of ViiV Healthcare and own stocks in GlaxoSmithKline.

Point-of-Care Detection of Nonadherence to Antiretroviral Treatment for HIV-1 in Resource-Limited Settings Using Drug Level Testing for Efavirenz, Lopinavir, and Dolutegravir: A Validation and Pharmacokinetic Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Virological failure during antiretroviral treatment (ART) may indicate the presence of drug resistance, but may also originate from nonadherence. Qualitative detection of ART components using drug level testing may be used to differentiate between these scenarios. We aimed to validate and implement qualitative point-of-care drug level tests for efavirenz (EFV), lopinavir (LPV), and dolutegravir (DTG) in rural South Africa. METHODS: Qualitative performance of immunoassays for EFV, LPV, and DTG was assessed by calculating limit of detection (LoD), region of uncertainty, and qualitative agreement with a reference test. Minimum duration of nonadherence resulting in a negative drug level test was assessed by simulation of treatment cessation using validated population pharmacokinetic models. RESULTS: LoD was 0.05 mg/L for EFV, 0.06 mg/L for LPV, and 0.02 mg/L for DTG. Region of uncertainty was 0.01-0.06 mg/L for EFV, 0.01-0.07 mg/L for LPV, and 0.01-0.02 mg/L for DTG. Qualitative agreement with reference testing at the LoD in patient samples was 95.2% (79/83) for EFV, 99.3% (140/141) for LPV, and 100% (118/118) for DTG. After simulated treatment cessation, median time to undetectability below LoD was 7 days [interquartile range (IQR) 4-13] for EFV, 30 hours (IQR 24-36) for LPV, and 6 days (IQR 4-7) for DTG. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that qualitative ART drug level testing using immunoassays is feasible in a rural resource-limited setting. Implementation of this technology enables reliable detection of recent nonadherence and may allow for rapid and cost-effective differentiation between patients in need for adherence counseling and patients who require drug resistance testing or alternative treatment.

[Effectiveness, safety, and economic impact of the bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide regimen in real clinical practice cohort of HIV-1 infected adult patients]. / Efectividad, seguridad e impacto económico del régimen de bictegravir/emtricitabina/tenofovir alafenamida en una cohorte de pacientes adultos infectados por VIH-1 en la práctica clínica real.

OBJECTIVE: Among the new antiretroviral treatment (ART) regimens, bictegravir (BIC) stands out, a recently incorporated integrase inhibitor. BIC conjugated with emtricitabine (FTC) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) has been shown to be non-inferior in efficacy as initiation therapy in a single daily dose regimen compared to other initiation ART. The objective of our study is to evaluate the impact of the inclusion of this new ART scheme in real clinical practice. METHODS: Observational, retrospective and descriptive study that included all adult HIV patients (age ≥18 years) who had been treated with BIC/FTC/TAF for at least 24 consecutive weeks for 1.5 year to evaluate effectiveness, safety and economic impact. RESULTS: A total of 115 patients were included. There were 28 patients without previous treatment, naive, (24.3%). The pretreated patients had a mean of 42±9 months of prior ART. The percentage of patients at week 24 after switching to BIC/FTC/TAF with suppressed plasma viral load was 88% in the naive group and 94.1% in the pretreated group. Adverse events were reported in 8 (7%) patients. The economic impact of the change to BIC/FTC/TAF for these patients was €1,202.63/patient/year, representing an increase of 9.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Our results correlate with the results of two phase 3 non-inferiority clinical trials in naive patients (88% and 84%) and those of a phase 3 non-inferiority clinical trial in pretreated patients (86%). However, we found a large difference between the high percentages of patients reporting an adverse event in three phase 3 clinical trials and our results.

Cost-effectiveness of olaparib maintenance therapy when used with and without restriction by BRCA1/2 mutation status for platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer.

Objectives: To determine whether olaparib maintenance therapy, used with and without restriction by BRCA1/2 mutation status, is cost-effective at the population level for platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer in Singapore.Methods: A partitioned survival model compared three management strategies: 1) treat all patients with olaparib; 2) test for germline BRCA1/2 mutation, followed by targeted olaparib use in mutation carriers only; 3) observe all patients. Mature overall survival (OS) data from Study 19 and a 15-year time horizon were used and direct medical costs were applied. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore uncertainties.Results: Treating all patients with olaparib was the most costly and effective strategy, followed by targeted olaparib use, and observation of all patients. Base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for all-olaparib and targeted use strategies were SGD133,394 (USD100,926) and SGD115,736 (USD87,566) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, respectively, compared to observation. ICERs were most sensitive to the cost of olaparib, time horizon and discount rate for outcomes. When these parameters were varied, ICERs remained above SGD92,000 (USD69,607)/QALY.Conclusions: At the current price, olaparib is not cost-effective when used with or without restriction by BRCA1/2 mutation status in Singapore, despite taking into account potential OS improvement over a long time horizon.

Healthcare resource utilization, costs and treatment patterns in patients with bipolar disorder treated with lurasidone or cariprazine.

OBJECTIVE: To compare healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and treatment adherence and persistence for patients with bipolar disorder treated with lurasidone or cariprazine. METHODS: Adult patients with bipolar disorder who initiated lurasidone or cariprazine as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy between 1 January 2016 and 30 June 2019 were identified from the IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Database. The date of the first claim for lurasidone or cariprazine was defined as the index date. A difference-in-difference (DID) analysis, which mitigated bias by using each cohort as its own control, compared the changes in HCRU and costs from 6-months pre-treatment (baseline) to 6-months post-treatment (follow-up) between the two cohorts. Treatment adherence (medication possession ratio and proportion of days covered) and persistence (time to discontinuation) were assessed during the 6-month post-treatment period. Adjusted analyses were conducted using inverse probability of treatment weighting on HCRU, costs, and time to discontinuation. RESULTS: A total of 16,683 patients treated with lurasidone and 4,128 patients treated with cariprazine were identified. Average age (39-40) and proportion female (68-71%) were similar between cohorts. Both cohorts had reductions in hospitalizations from baseline to follow-up, and the decrease was significantly greater for the lurasidone cohort compared to the cariprazine cohort (change in the proportions of patients with all-cause hospitalizations: -5.3% vs. -2.5%, DID = -2.8%, p<.001). The total healthcare costs increased from baseline to follow-up in both cohorts, and the increase was significantly lower for the lurasidone cohort (change in total all-cause healthcare cost per person: $3,413 vs. $4,642, DID=-$1,228, p = .022). The lurasidone cohort had significantly lower risk of discontinuing treatment (hazard ratio = 0.86, p<.001) than the cariprazine cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with bipolar disorder treated with lurasidone had greater reductions in hospitalizations from 6-months pre-treatment to 6-months post-treatment and had a lower increase in total costs compared to patients treated with cariprazine.

Patient cost sharing during poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: More patients with ovarian cancer are being treated with poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors because regulatory agencies have granted these drugs new approvals for a variety of treatment indications. However, poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors are expensive. When administered as a maintenance therapy, these drugs may be administered for months or years. How much of this cost patients experience as out-of-pocket spending is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the out-of-pocket spending that patients experience during poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment and to characterize which healthcare services account for that spending. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was performed with a sample of patients with ovarian cancer treated between 2014 and 2017 with olaparib, niraparib, or rucaparib. Patients were identified using MarketScan, a health insurance claims database. All insurance claims during poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment were collected. The primary outcome variable was the patients' out-of-pocket spending (copayment, coinsurance, and deductibles) during poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment for the medication itself. Other outcomes of interest included out-of-pocket spending for other healthcare services, the types and frequency of other healthcare services used, health plan spending, the estimated proportion of patients' household income used each month for healthcare, and patients' out-of-pocket spending immediately before poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment. RESULTS: We identified 503 patients with ovarian cancer with a median age of 55 years (interquartile range, 50-62 years); 83% of those had out-of-pocket spendings during poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment. The median treatment duration was 124 days (interquartile range, 66-240 days). The mean out-of-pocket spending for poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors was $305 (standard deviation, $2275) per month. On average, this accounted for 44.8% (standard deviation, 34.8%) of the patients' overall monthly out-of-pocket spending. The mean out-of-pocket spending for other healthcare services was $165 (standard deviation, $769) per month. Health plans spent, on average, $12,661 (standard deviation, $15,668) per month for poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors and $7108 (standard deviation, $15,254) per month for all other healthcare services. The cost sharing for office visits, laboratory tests, and imaging studies represented the majority of non-poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment out-of-pocket spending. The average amount patients paid for all healthcare services per month during poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment was $470 (standard deviation, $2407), which was estimated to be 8.7% of the patients' monthly household income. The mean out-of-pocket spending in the 12 months before poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment was $3110 (standard deviation, $6987). CONCLUSION: Patients can face high out-of-pocket costs for poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, although the sum of cost sharing for other healthcare services used during poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment is often higher. The spending on healthcare costs consumes a large proportion of these patients' household income. Patients with ovarian cancer experience high out-of-pocket costs for healthcare, both before and during poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment.