Cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin plus chemotherapy for previously untreated CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphoma in Canada.

AIMS: To support reimbursement requests in Canada, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris) in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A + CHP) compared with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) as frontline treatment for CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) using results from the ECHELON-2 clinical trial. The PTCL subtypes included were systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL), PTCL-not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS), and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A partitioned survival model consisting of three health states (progression-free survival [PFS], post-progression survival [PPS], and death) was constructed from the perspective of the Canadian publicly funded healthcare system over a lifetime horizon. Efficacy, safety, and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) data were obtained from ECHELON-2. Medical resource use and costs were derived from Canadian literature and standard sources. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained were calculated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for uncertainty in key parameters. All costs are reported in Canadian dollars. RESULTS: A + CHP, when compared with CHOP, was associated with an estimated mean gain of 2.90 LYs and 2.38 QALYs and a mean incremental cost of $76,491. The ICER for A + CHP compared with CHOP was estimated at $26,340 per LY gained and $32,177 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analyses, the ICERs remained below $60,000 per QALY gained. Time horizon, patient starting age, and discount rate affected the results, as the ICER was driven by long-term survival gains observed with A + CHP compared with CHOP. LIMITATIONS: Real-world downstream treatments (such as stem cell transplantation) may differ from the treatment protocol followed in the ECHELON-2 trial. CONCLUSIONS: A + CHP compared with CHOP provides a cost-effective treatment option with improved clinical outcomes that are clinically relevant and a comparable safety profile for adults with previously untreated CD30-expressing sALCL, PTCL-NOS, or AITL in Canada.

The clinical and economic burden of peripheral T-cell lymphoma: a systematic literature review.

Aim: To understand the burden of treatment-naive peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted in November 2020 following best practice methodology. Results: Fifty-five clinical studies were included, mostly investigating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) or 'CHOP-like' regimens, with combination regimens showing similar effectiveness to CHOP alone. Aside from the combination of brentuximab vedotin + cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and prednisone (A+CHP), other available treatments showed no statistically significant benefit over CHOP in terms of overall or progression-free survival in overall PTCL patients. The mean monthly cost per patient in the USA ranged from 6328 to US$9356 based on six studies. One economic evaluation demonstrated A+CHP to be a more cost-effective treatment option than CHOP. Conclusion: Further research is needed to understand the humanistic and cost impact of frontline treatment for PTCL and its specific subtypes.

Plain language summary Peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) is an aggressive cancer that develops from white blood cells called T cells, which are an important part of the immune system. There is limited knowledge on the impact PTCL has on patients and their families. This systematic review of 55 clinical studies was conducted to further understand how safe and effective current treatments are for patients with newly diagnosed PTCL, how these treatments and disease impact their quality of life, and the economic impact of treatment and disease. Chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone [CHOP]) was the most commonly studied regimen, but had limited effectiveness and a notable side effect profile. A newer treatment option, brentuximab vedotin + cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and prednisone (A+CHP) was the only treatment to show a significant added benefit over CHOP for patients, with side effects that were comparable to those of CHOP. Six studies assessed the economic impact of PTCL, the majority of which were focused on the USA, and found the mean monthly cost per patient to be 6328­US$9356. No studies were identified that assessed the impact of PTCL or its treatment on quality of life. Further research is needed to understand the impact of frontline PTCL treatment on patients and their families.

Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs Among Medicare Beneficiaries Newly Diagnosed With Peripheral T-cell Lymphoma: A Retrospective Claims Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the treatment patterns, health care resource utilization (HRU), survival outcomes, and medical costs among Medicare beneficiaries newly diagnosed with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of data from the Medicare Fee-For-Service claims database using the 100% sample of the Medicare research identifiable files. Patients identified for analysis were aged ≥ 65 years and had received a PTCL diagnosis between January 2011 and December 2017. Outcomes included patient characteristics, HRU, direct all-cause and PTCL-specific health care costs, treatment patterns, and overall survival. Patients were followed until disenrollment, death, or end of the study period. RESULTS: Overall, 2551 patients with PTCL were included, among whom 37% had ≥ 1 emergency department visit and 42% had ≥ 1 hospitalization during the pre-index period. During follow-up (median, 2.0 years), 70% of patients were hospitalized at least once (mean length of stay, 1.34 days); 22% advanced to hospice care. A total of 1593 patients received ≥ 1 identifiable treatment regimen post index, of whom 26% received CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) and 3% CHOEP (CHOP plus etoposide), whereas 71% received other regimens. The median overall survival among patients receiving identifiable therapy was 4.6 years. The mean adjusted per-person-per-month all-cause costs among the overall PTCL cohort during follow-up were $5930; the mean disease-related costs were $2384. Costs were driven primarily by hospitalizations (38%) and outpatient services (28%). CONCLUSIONS: Medicare beneficiaries newly diagnosed with PTCL have high HRU and cost burden, with no evident standard of care in real-world practice.

Cost-utility analysis of pralatrexate for relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma based on a case-matched historical control study along with single arm clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (R/R PTCL) treated with pralatrexate have previously shown superior overall survival (OS) compared to those who underwent conventional chemotherapy (CC, 15.4 vs. 4.07 months). We conducted an economic evaluation of pralatrexate from a societal perspective in Korea based on data from the PROPEL phase II study. METHODS: Using a Markov model with a weekly cycle, we simulated the experience of patients with R/R PTCL receiving pralatrexate or CC for 15 years. The model consists of five health states; initial treatment, treatment pause, subsequent treatment, stem cell transplantation (SCT) success, and death. Comparative effectiveness was based on PROPEL phase II single-arm study and its matched historical control analysis. Costs included drug, drug administration, monitoring, adverse event management, and SCT costs. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the base case was $39,153 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The results of one-way sensitivity analysis ranged from $33,949 to $51,846 per QALY gained, which remained within an implicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of anticancer drugs in Korea. CONCLUSIONS: Pralatrexate is a cost-effective intervention with improved OS and incremental costs within the WTP limit. Pralatrexate could function as a new therapeutic option for patients suffering from life-threatening R/R PTCL.

Cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin with chemotherapy in treatment of CD30-expressing PTCL.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris) in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) in the first-line setting for CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). STUDY DESIGN: An economic model was developed using clinical and quality-of-life (QOL) data from the ECHELON-2 trial, in which A+CHP demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP). METHODS: A partitioned survival model, consisting of 3 health states (PFS, postprogression survival, and death), was constructed from a US payer perspective over a lifetime time horizon. PFS and OS observed from ECHELON-2 were extrapolated using standard parametric distributions. The best-fitting distributions (log-normal for both arms) were selected based on statistical goodness of fit and clinical plausibility of the long-term projections. Utilities were based on the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensional data collected in ECHELON-2. Medical resource use and costs were from literature and standard sources. RESULTS: The model predicted that A+CHP extended PFS and OS by 2.92 and 3.38 years, respectively, over CHOP. After incorporating QOL and discounting, A+CHP was associated with 1.79 quality-adjusted life-years gained at a total incremental cost of $159,388, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $89,217. Sensitivity analyses provided ICERs ranging approximately from $57,000 to $138,000. The estimated probability that A+CHP is cost-effective compared with CHOP was 82% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the ECHELON-2 trial data, this analysis found A+CHP to be cost-effective for patients with previously untreated CD30-expressing PTCL.

Clinical and economic burden of peripheral T-cell lymphoma in commercially insured patients in the United States: findings using real-world claims data.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective cohort study utilized real-world claims data to assess the clinical and economic burden of peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) over the continuum of care in the US. METHODS: Data were extracted from US administrative claims databases to identify adult patients with PTCL (ICD-9-CM code 202.7X) diagnosed between October 2007 and June 2011. Patients had to have ≥6 months of continuous enrollment before and ≥12 months of continuous enrollment after their index date (date of first PTCL diagnosis). PTCL patients were matched (1:5) by age, sex, region, plan type, payer type, and length of continuous enrollment, to a control group of randomly selected patients without PTCL. Patient-level healthcare resource utilization data and associated costs (in US dollars) were measured. Mean costs per patient per month were determined. RESULTS: Of 2820 patients with PTCL, 1000 met all inclusion criteria (median age = 57 years; 57.5% male) and were matched to the control group (n = 5000). On an average monthly basis, PTCL patients were hospitalized more frequently (0.07 vs 0.01 admissions; p < 0.0001) and had a longer length of hospital stay (6.4 vs 4.0 days; p < 0.0001) compared with controls. PTCL patients also had higher monthly utilization of pharmacy services (2.85 vs 0.97 prescriptions; p < 0.0001), office visits (1.35 vs 0.34 visits; p < 0.0001), ER visits (0.07 vs 0.02 visits; p < 0.0001), hospice stays (0.05 vs 0.01 stays; p < 0.0001) and other patient services/procedures. Overall, PTCL patients incurred higher average monthly costs per patient compared with control patients ($6327.84 vs $388.39; p < 0.0001), driven mainly by hospitalizations (32.2% of overall costs) and pharmacy services (19.6%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first real-world study to quantify healthcare resource utilization, costly treatment, and overall medical expenditure in commercially insured PTCL patients. Better tolerated and more effective treatments may improve disease management and reduce the clinical and economic burden of PTCL.

Administration costs of intravenous chemotherapy in treating peripheral T-cell lymphoma.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective cohort analysis was conducted to examine the cost components of administering IV chemotherapy to peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) patients in the US to inform decision makers. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with PTCL (ICD-9 code 202.7X) between 1 October 2007 and 30 September 2012 were identified from a US administrative claims database. Costs for patients receiving at least one NCCN recommended IV chemotherapy were assessed using the allowed payment from claim line items, categorized into cost components (study drug costs, IV administration costs and other visit-related services). RESULTS: The mean costs to the payer for IV cancer therapy administration in a PTCL patient population averaged about $5735 per visit and $9356 per member per month (PMPM). Across all therapies, mean IV administration costs accounted for $127-$794 per visit and $594-$1808 PMPM, contributing an additional 2-32% to the total costs of the drug alone. Mean other visit-related services costs for treating PTCL accounted for $70-$2487 per visit and $444-$3094 PMPM, contributing an additional 2-74% to the total costs. Combined, these additional costs represent an additional mean cost of $220-$3150 per visit and $1193-$4609 PMPM to the base price of the drug alone. LIMITATIONS: This study used a convenience sample to identify PTCL patients and only included visits where at least one NCCN recommended IV chemotherapy was administered. CONCLUSIONS: The costs of IV administration and other visit-related services add measurable costs to the total cost of IV therapy for treating PTCL. When considering the cost of the drug, these additional costs can represent a substantial proportion of the overall costs and must be considered when evaluating the costs of IV treatment options for PTCL.