Cost-Effectiveness of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel for Adult Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: The results of a recent single-arm trial (ZUMA-5) of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) for relapsed/refractory (r/r) follicular lymphoma (FL) demonstrated high rates of durable response and tolerable toxicity among treated patients. To quantify the value of axi-cel compared with standard of care (SOC) to manage r/r FL patients who have had at least 2 prior lines of systemic therapy (3L+), a cost-effectiveness model was developed from a US third-party payer perspective. METHODS: A 3-state partitioned-survival cost-effectiveness model was developed with a lifetime horizon. Patient-level analyses of the 36-month ZUMA-5 (axi-cel) and SCHOLAR-5 (SOC) studies were used to extrapolate progression-free and overall survivals. After 5 years of survival, an estimated 40% of the modeled population was assumed to experience long-term remission based on literature. Results include the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) measured as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. One-way sensitivity analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and scenario analyses were performed. All outcomes were discounted 3% per year. RESULTS: Axi-cel led to an increase of 4.28 life-years, 3.64 QALYs, and a total cost increase of $321 192 relative to SOC, resulting in an ICER of $88 300 per QALY. Across all parameters varied in the one-way sensitivity analysis, the ICER varied between $133 030 and $67 277. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, axi-cel had a 99% probability of being cost-effective across 5000 iterations using a $150 000 willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Given the robustness of the model results and sensitivity analyses, axi-cel is expected to be a cost-effective treatment in 3L+ r/r FL.

Don't keep me waiting: estimating the lifetime impact of reduced vein-to-vein time for CAR-T treated patients with LBCL.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies have revolutionized the treatment of hematological cancers. Production requires a complex logistical process from leukapheresis to patient infusion, the vein-to-vein time (V2VT), during which a patients clinical condition may deteriorate. This study was designed to estimate the benefits of reduced V2VT for third-line+ (3L+) relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (r/r LBCL) patients treated with CAR T. A mathematical model was developed to estimate the lifetime outcomes of a hypothetical cohort of patients who had either a 'long' or 'short' V2VT. Life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs were estimated. Scenario analyses were performed to assess the robustness of results to key assumptions.  The results of the model show that reducing V2VT from 54 days (tisa-cel median V2VT; JULIET) to 24 days (axi-cel median V2VT; ZUMA-1) led to a 3.2-year gain in life expectancy (4.2 vs 7.7 LYs), and 2.4 additional QALYs (3.2 vs 5.6) per patient. Furthermore, a shorter V2VT was shown to be cost-effective under conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds in the United States. Results are driven by a higher infusion rate and and a better efficacy of CAR T-cell therapy for those infused. Scenario analyses using a smaller difference in V2VT (24 vs 36 days) produced consistent results. Our study is the first to quantify lifetime V2VT-related outcomes for 3L+ r/r LBCL patients treated with CAR T utilizing currently available evidence. Shorter V2VTs led to improved outcomes, demonstrating the importance of timely infusion achievable by faster manufacturing times and optimization of hospital delivery.

Network meta-analysis of CAR T-Cell therapy for the treatment of 3L+ R/R LBCL after using published comparative studies.

INTRODUCTION: Studies have compared chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies and salvage chemotherapy in relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) patients, but further evidence of their relative effectiveness is warranted. METHODS: Our systematic review identified studies comparing efficacy and safety outcomes of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) trials to salvage chemotherapy cohorts in LBCL patients with ≥2 prior lines of treatment; and an extended evidence network included indirect comparisons comparing CAR T-cell therapies. We conducted network meta-analyzes using Bayesian hierarchical modeling. RESULTS: Three studies comparing ZUMA-1 (axi-cel), TRANSCEND (liso-cel) and JULIET (tisa-cel) trials to salvage chemotherapy within the SCHOLAR-1 cohort were identified. Axi-cel (odds ratio [OR]:5.63; 95% credible interval [CrI]:2.66-12.42) and liso-cel (OR:4.26; 95%CrI:2.33-7.93) showed a significant increased overall response rate compared to tisa-cel, but not to one-another. Axi-cel demonstrated significant improvements in overall survival relative to liso-cel (hazard ratio [HR]:0.54; 95%CrI:0.37-0.79) and tisa-cel (HR:0.47; 95%CrI:0.26-0.88). Higher rates of grade ≥3 neurological events were observed with axi-cel than with tisa-cel and liso-cel. CONCLUSIONS: We highlight important differences in clinical outcomes between CAR T-cell therapies. Axi-cel demonstrated improved overall survival compared to tisa-cel and liso-cel, and both axi-cel and liso-cel showed higher response rates compared to tisa-cel.

A Comparison of 3-Year Follow-up of ZUMA-5 (Axicabtagene Ciloleucel) With SCHOLAR-5 in Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma.

In the pivotal ZUMA-5 trial, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel; an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy) demonstrated high rates of durable response in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma patients. SCHOLAR-5 is an external control cohort designed to act as a comparator to ZUMA-5. Here, we present an updated comparative analysis of ZUMA-5 and SCHOLAR-5, using the 36-month follow-up data and the intent-to-treat population of ZUMA-5. Using propensity-score methods, 127 patients in ZUMA-5 were compared to 129 patients in SCHOLAR-5. At this extended follow-up, axi-cel continues to demonstrate clinically meaningful benefits in survival compared to historically available treatments in this population.

Cost-effectiveness of axicabtagene ciloleucel versus tisagenlecleucel for the treatment of 3L + relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma in the United States: incorporating longer survival results.

AIMS: To provide an update on the cost-effectiveness of the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) among patients who have previously received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy using more mature clinical trial data cuts (60 months for axi-cel overall survival [OS] and 45 months for tisa-cel OS and progression-free survival [PFS]). METHODS: A partitioned survival model consisting of three health states (pre-progression, post-progression and death) was used to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs associated with axi-cel and tisa-cel over a lifetime horizon. PFS and OS inputs for axi-cel and tisa-cel were based on a previously published matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison (MAIC). Long-term OS and PFS were extrapolated using parametric survival mixture cure models (PS-MCMs). Costs of CAR-T cell therapy drug acquisition and administration, conditioning chemotherapy, apheresis, CAR T-specific monitoring, stem cell transplant, hospitalization, adverse events, routine care, and terminal care were sourced from US cost databases. Health state utilities were derived from previous publications. Model inputs were varied using a range of sensitivity and scenario analyses. RESULTS: Compared with tisa-cel, axi-cel resulted in 2.51 additional QALYs and $50,185 additional costs (an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] of $19,994 per QALY gained). In probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), the ICER for axi-cel versus tisa-cel was ≤$50,000/QALY in 99.4% of simulations and ≤$33,500 in 99% of simulations. Axi-cel remained cost-effective versus tisa-cel (assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY) across a range of scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: With longer-term survival data, axi-cel continues to represent a cost-effective option versus tisa-cel for treatment of r/r LBCL among patients who have previously received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy, from a US payer perspective.

Trends in Prevalence and Incidence of Alopecia Areata, Alopecia Totalis, and Alopecia Universalis Among Adults and Children in a US Employer-Sponsored Insured Population.

Importance: Alopecia areata (AA) is characterized by nonscarring hair loss of the scalp, face, and/or body. Alopecia totalis (AT) and alopecia universalis (AU) involve complete loss of the scalp and body hair, respectively. The epidemiology of AA in the US remains unclear, having previously been extrapolated from older studies that were limited to specific geographic areas or clinical settings, or from self-reported data. Objective: To estimate the annual prevalence and incidence of AA and AT and/or AU (AT/AU) in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cohort study was conducted from January 2016 to December 2019 and included enrollees in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental databases and their dependents, with plan enrollment during each study calendar year and the year prior. Exposures: Prevalent cases were identified by 1 or more claims for AA or AT/AU (International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-10-CM] codes L63.x, L63.0, L63.1) during each year of interest or the year prior. Incident cases were identified by 1 or more claims for AA or AT/AU during a specific year and no diagnosis the year prior. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual incidence and prevalence rates were calculated and stratified by age, sex, and region. National employer-sponsored insurance population estimates were obtained using population-based weights. Results: Among eligible patients (2016: n = 18 368 [mean (SD) age, 40.6 (17.9) years; 12 295 women (66.9%)]; 2017: n = 14 372 [mean (SD) age, 39.6 (17.7) years; 9195 women (64.0%)]; 2018: n = 14 231 [mean (SD) age, 38.9 (17.3) years; 8998 women (63.2%)]; 2019: n = 13 455 [mean (SD) age, 39.1 (17.4) years; 8322 women (61.9%)]), AA prevalence increased from 0.199% (95% CI, 0.198%-0.200%) in 2016 to 0.222% (95% CI, 0.221%-0.223%) in 2019. Roughly 5% to 10% of prevalent and incident cases of AA were AT/AU. The prevalence of AT/AU increased from 0.012% (95% CI, 0.012%-0.013%) to 0.019% (95% CI, 0.018%-0.019%) from 2016 to 2019. Incidence of AA per 100 000 person-years ranged from 87.39 (95% CI, 86.84-87.96) in 2017 to 92.90 (95% CI, 92.35-93.45) in 2019. Incidence of AT/AU ranged from 7.09 (95% CI, 6.94-7.25) in 2017 to 8.92 (95% CI, 8.75-9.09) in 2016. Prevalence and incidence of AA and AT/AU were higher among female vs male individuals, adults vs children and adolescents, and in the Northeast vs other regions. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study suggest that these recent AA prevalence and incidence estimates could help improve current understanding of the disease burden. Further research is warranted to elucidate subpopulation differences and trends in AA in the broader US population.

Patient characteristics associated with all-cause healthcare costs of alopecia areata in the United States.

Evidence on the factors of medical costs involved in the care of people with alopecia areata (AA) is limited, but mounting evidence points to significant variation in financial impact for patients with AA in the absence of effective treatments. This study explored drivers of medical costs among privately insured adults and adolescents with AA in the United States. The study found that patients of middle age (45­64 years), located in the Northeast region, with comprehensive health insurance, with greater extent of hair loss, or with other health disorders face greater all-cause medical costs. Adult females of young (18­44 years) and older (65+ years) age also faced greater costs on average. This research confirms high variability in the burden of AA, pointing to population subgroups that may be more affected by the disease and its commonly associated disorders.

A 24-month updated analysis of the comparative effectiveness of ZUMA-5 (axi-cel) vs. SCHOLAR-5 external control in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: In the ZUMA-5 trial (Clinical trials identification: NCT03105336), axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel; a chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy) demonstrated high rates of durable response in relapsed/refractory (r/r) follicular lymphoma (FL) patients and clear superiority relative to the SCHOLAR-5 external control cohort. We update this comparison using the ZUMA-5 24-month data. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The SCHOLAR-5 cohort is comprised of r/r FL patients who initiated ≥3rd line of therapy after July 2014 and meeting ZUMA-5 eligibility criteria. Groups were balanced for patient characteristics through propensity scoring on prespecified prognostic factors using standardized mortality ratio (SMR) weighting. The overall response rate was compared using a weighted logistic regression. Time-to-event outcomes were evaluated using a Cox regression. RESULTS: For SCHOLAR-5, the sum of weights for the 143 patients was 85 after SMR weighting, versus 86 patients in ZUMA-5. The median follow-up was 29.4 months and 25.4 months for ZUMA-5 and SCHOLAR-5, respectively. The hazard ratios for overall survival and progression-free survival were 0.52 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.95) and 0.28 (95% CI: 0.17-0.45), favoring axi-cel. CONCLUSION: This updated analysis, using a longer minimum follow-up than a previously published analysis, shows that the improved efficacy of axi-cel, relative to available therapies, in r/r FL is durable. .

The Association of Alopecia Areata-Related Emotional Symptoms with Work Productivity and Daily Activity Among Patients with Alopecia Areata.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with alopecia areata (AA) experience psychological and psychosocial symptoms including depression, anxiety, anger, social withdrawal, embarrassment, and low self-esteem. While multiple studies have measured the detrimental emotional impact of AA on patient quality of life, evidence of its effect on work productivity loss (WPL) and daily activities is limited. This study aimed to assess the extent of AA-related emotional symptom (ES) burden on work productivity and activity impairment. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of dermatologists and their adult patients with AA was conducted in the USA in 2019. Dermatologists provided assessments of patients' clinical characteristics, while patients completed sociodemographic questionnaires along with two validated patient-reported outcome measures of the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) and the AA Patient Priority Outcomes (AAPPO) ES subscale. The WPAI assessed AA-related WPL (employed respondents) and activity impairment (all respondents), and the AAPPO-ES assessed AA-related frequency of feeling self-conscious, embarrassed, sad, or frustrated. Multiple linear regression models were fitted to both WPAI scores with the AAPPO ES as an independent variable. RESULTS: A total of 242 patients with a mean (SD) age of 39.2 (13.3) years, treated by 59 dermatologists, were evaluated. Mean (SD) ES score was 2.0 (1.1). Mean (SD) work productivity loss [n = 170] and activity impairment [n = 242] were 12.2% (17.4%) and 13.3% (18.3%), respectively. After adjusting for covariates, WPL increased by 4.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-6.7%; p = 0.002] and activity impairment increased by 3.1% (95% CI 0.7-5.4%; p = 0.010) for every 1-point increase in ES. For an average patient, a 1-SD decrease (about 1 point) on the ES scale substantially reduced WPL and activity impairment (by at least 25%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AA reported significant increases in WPL and activity impairment associated with worsening AA-related ES. These findings underscore the substantial emotional and psychosocial burden among patients with AA and a need for improved treatment options.

Treatment Patterns and Treatment Satisfaction Among Adults with Alopecia Areata in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Alopecia areata (AA), an autoimmune disease, is characterized by non-scarring hair loss involving the scalp, face, and/or body. Prior to 2022, no US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved treatments for AA were available in the USA; existing treatment options had limited efficacy and durability and are often associated with side effects. This study aimed to evaluate the current AA treatment patterns and treatment satisfaction as reported by dermatologists. METHODS: Real-world data from a 2019 cross-sectional survey of US dermatologists and their adult patients with AA were analyzed. Dermatologists provided comprehensive data on their patients with AA, including AA dermatologist-assessed severity, treatments, treatment duration, treatment satisfaction, and reasons for dissatisfaction. The switching patterns among the proportion of patients on each of the treatment groups at the time of survey and, for those with prescription history, were reported. RESULTS: A total of 442 patients with AA, treated by 90 dermatologists, were included in this analysis. At the time of survey, 45% of patients were being prescribed a combination of corticosteroids, 21% injectable corticosteroids, 11% topical corticosteroids/topical calcineurin inhibitor, and 10% immunomodulator as monotherapy or in combination. The majority (65%) of patients had no prior reported therapy. Among patients who were reported to have a prior therapy, frequent switching was to combination corticosteroids, injectable corticosteroids, and immunomodulators. Overall treatment dissatisfaction was high (24% dissatisfied and 29% neutral) and increased with AA severity. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides a snapshot of the different local and systemic treatment options currently being used in a real-world treatment setting. Unfortunately, none of these treatments provide a sustainable, safe, and relapse-free solution, which leads to high treatment dissatisfaction rates and hence indicates a significant unmet need for the new and advanced treatment options for patients with AA.

Healthcare Utilization and Costs Among US Adolescents With Alopecia Areata.

Background: Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disease of hair loss affecting people of all ages. Alopecia totalis (AT) and universalis (AU) involve scalp and total body hair loss, respectively. AA significantly affects quality of life, but evidence on the economic burden in adolescents is limited. Objectives: To assess healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and all-cause direct healthcare costs, including out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, of US adolescents with AA. Methods: IBM MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare databases were used to identify patients aged 12-17 years with ≥2 claims with AA/AT/AU diagnosis (prevalent cases), from October 1, 2015, to March 31, 2018, enrolled for ≥12 months before and after the first AA diagnosis (index). Patients were matched 1:3 to non-AA controls on index year, demographics, plan type, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Per patient per year HCRU and costs were compared post-index. Results: Patients comprised 130 AT/AU adolescents and 1105 non-AT/AU adolescents (53.8% female; mean age, 14.6 years). Post-index, AT/AU vs controls had more outpatient (14.5 vs 7.1) and dermatologist (3.6 vs 0.3) visits, higher mean plan costs ($9397 vs $2267), including medical ($7480 vs $1780) and pharmacy ($1918 vs $487) costs, and higher OOP costs ($2081 vs $751) (all P<.001). The non-AT/AU cohort vs controls had more outpatient (11.6 vs 8.0) and dermatologist (3.4 vs 0.4) visits, higher mean plan costs ($7587 vs $4496), and higher OOP costs ($1579 vs $805) (all P<.001). Discussion: This large-sample, real-world analysis found that adolescents with prevalent AA had significantly higher HCRU and all-cause costs than matched controls. The greater burden was driven by more frequent outpatient visits, and higher payer medical and pharmacy costs in comparison with controls. Oral corticosteroid use was higher among patients with AT/AU; topical and injectable corticosteroid use was higher for non-AT/AU. Although the data preclude the identification of AA-attributable costs, the matched-control design allows an estimation of incremental all-cause costs associated with AA. Conclusions: Adolescents with AA incurred substantial incremental healthcare costs, with greater costs incurred among those with AT/AU. Study findings suggest that AA incurs costs as a medical condition with a high burden on adolescent patients and health plans.

All-cause health care resource utilization and costs among adults with alopecia areata: A retrospective claims database study in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by hair loss. Patients may present with hair loss of the scalp, eyelashes, eyebrows, and/or body. Alopecia totalis (AT), total scalp hair loss, or alopecia universalis (AU), total body hair loss, are extensive forms. Although the impact of AA on quality of life is understood, evidence of its economic burden is limited. A better understanding of the all-cause health care costs for health plans and patients with AA is critical to comprehend disease burden. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate all-cause health care resource utilization and direct health care costs in US adults with AA with or without AT or AU, vs matched control subjects. METHODS: Patients (≥ 18 years) with AA with no less than 2 claims of AA at diagnosis (October 31, 2015, to March 3, 2018) were identified in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental databases. Patients were enrolled no less than 12 months before and after first diagnosis (index). Patients were grouped according to AT or AU status (AT/AU group) or AA without AT/AU (non-AT/AU group) and matched 1:3 to control subjects without AA/AT/AU. Summary statistics were calculated for demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: At baseline, there were 14,972 adult patients with AA and 44,916 control subjects. Of patients with AA, 1,250 and 13,722 were in the AT/AU and non-AT/AU groups, respectively. A significantly greater proportion of patients with AA had atopic and autoimmune comorbidities vs control subjects. After index, patients with AA used significantly more corticosteroid treatments (injectable/oral/topical) than control subjects. A greater mean number of annual outpatient and dermatologist visits was observed for both AA groups vs control subjects (outpatient visits: AT/AU group: 17.8 vs 11.8; non-AT/AU group: 15.4 vs 11.2; dermatologist visits: AT/AU group: 3.4 vs 0.4; non-AT/AU group: 3.4 vs 0.4; P < 0.001 for all). Mean total all-cause medical and pharmacy costs (2018 US$) were higher in both AA groups vs control subjects (AT/AU group: $18,988 vs $11,030; non-AT/AU group: $13,686 vs $9,336; P < 0.001 for both). Patient out-of-pocket costs were higher for AA vs control subjects (AT/AU group: $2,685 vs $1,457; non-AT/AU group: $2,223 vs $1,341; P < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with control subjects, patients with AA are more likely to have atopic and autoimmune comorbidities, to use corticosteroids, and to make outpatient visits. Patients with AA have greater all-cause medical (including pharmacy) and out-of-pocket costs. The difference in total medical costs for patients with AT/AU vs control subjects is higher than the difference for patients with non-AT/AU vs control subjects. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Pfizer Inc was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; and the decision to submit this report for publication. A. Mostaghimi reports consulting fees from Pfizer Inc, Concert, Lilly, AbbVie, hims, and Digital Diagnostics; reports equity from Lucid and hims; and is an associate editor at JAMA Dermatology. K. Gandhi, M. Ray, and V. Sikirica are former employees of Pfizer Inc and held stock and/or stock options with Pfizer Inc at the time of writing. N. Done, W. Gao, C. Carley, T. Wang, and E. Swallow are employees of Analysis Group, Inc, a consultancy that received payment from Pfizer Inc for participation in this analysis.

The Short- and Long-Term Burden of Acute Pancreatitis in the United States: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: This retrospective cohort study assessed short- and long-term economic, clinical burden, and productivity impacts of acute pancreatitis (AP) in the United States. METHODS: United States claims data from patients hospitalized for AP (January 1, 2011-September-30, 2016) were sourced from MarketScan databases. Patients were categorized by index AP severity: severe intensive care unit (ICU), severe non-ICU, and other hospitalized patients. RESULTS: During index, 41,946 patients were hospitalized or visited an emergency department for AP. For inpatients, median (interquartile range) AP-related total cost was $13,187 ($12,822) and increased with AP severity (P < 0.0001). During the postindex year, median AP-related costs were higher (P < 0.0001) for severe ICU versus severe non-ICU and other hospitalized patients. Hours lost and costs due to absence and short-term disability were similar between categories. Long-term disability costs were higher (P = 0.005) for severe ICU versus other hospitalized patients. Factors associated with higher total all-cause costs in the year after discharge included AP severity, length of hospitalization, readmission, AP reoccurrence, progression to chronic pancreatitis, or new-onset diabetes (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: An AP event exerts substantial burden during hospitalization and involves long-term clinical and economic consequences, including loss of productivity, which increase with index AP event severity.