Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Combination Therapy as First-line Treatment for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma in Japan.
Maeda, Tomomi; Moriwaki, Kensuke; Morimoto, Kosuke; Mo, Xiuting; Yoshioka, Takashi; Goto, Rei; Shimozuma, Kojiro.
Afiliação
  • Maeda T; Graduate School of Health Management, Keio University, Fujisawa city, Kanagawa, Japan. Electronic address: m_tomomi@keio.jp.
  • Moriwaki K; Comprehensive Unit for Health Economic Evidence Review and Decision Support (CHEERS), Research Organization of Science and Technology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto city, Kyoto, Japan.
  • Morimoto K; Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto city, Kyoto, Japan.
  • Mo X; Comprehensive Unit for Health Economic Evidence Review and Decision Support (CHEERS), Research Organization of Science and Technology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto city, Kyoto, Japan.
  • Yoshioka T; School of Medicine, Keio University, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Goto R; Graduate School of Business Administration, Keio University, Yokohama city, Kanagawa, Japan.
  • Shimozuma K; Comprehensive Unit for Health Economic Evidence Review and Decision Support (CHEERS), Research Organization of Science and Technology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto city, Kyoto, Japan.
Value Health Reg Issues ; 40: 118-126, 2024 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38194896
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

The purpose of this study is to examine the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) combination therapy (NIVO + IPI) compared with the sunitinib (SUN) therapy for Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma from the perspective of a Japanese health insurance payer.

METHODS:

A lifetime horizon was applied, and 2% per annum was set as the discount rate. The threshold was set as $ 75 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. For the analytical method, we used a partitioned survival analysis model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), which is calculated by dividing incremental costs by incremental QALYs. Progression-free survival, progressive disease, and death were set as health states. Additionally, cost parameters and utility weights were set as key parameters. We set the intermediate/poor-risk population as the base case. Scenario analysis was conducted for the intention-to-treat population and the favorable risk population. Furthermore, one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted for each population.

RESULTS:

In the base-case analysis, the QALYs of NIVO + IPI and SUN were 4.32 and 2.99, respectively. NIVO + IPI conferred 1.34 additional QALYs. Meanwhile, the total costs in the NIVO + IPI and SUN were $692 288 and $475 481, respectively. As a result, the ICER of NIVO + IPI compared with SUN was estimated to be $162 243 per QALY gained. The parameter that greatly affected the ICER was the utility weight of progression-free survival in NIVO + IPI.

CONCLUSIONS:

NIVO + IPI for advanced renal cell carcinoma seems to be not cost-effective compared with the SUN in the Japanese healthcare system.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Carcinoma de Células Renais / Neoplasias Renais Tipo de estudo: Health_economic_evaluation Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Asia Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Carcinoma de Células Renais / Neoplasias Renais Tipo de estudo: Health_economic_evaluation Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Asia Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article