Cargando…
Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma
BACKGROUND: Most cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (CSCCs) can be treated with surgical excision or radiation; however, approximately 1% of patients develop advanced disease. In 2018, the FDA approved cemiplimab-rwlc as the first programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody for the treatment...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10394223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34351214 http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2021.21164 |
_version_ | 1785083322048708608 |
---|---|
author | Paul, Eleanor Konidaris, Gerasimos Cope, Shannon Chen, Chieh-I Keeping, Sam Xu, Yingxin Atsou, Kokuvi Ayers, Dieter Guyot, Patricia Sasane, Medha Mojebi, Ali Kuznik, Andreas |
author_facet | Paul, Eleanor Konidaris, Gerasimos Cope, Shannon Chen, Chieh-I Keeping, Sam Xu, Yingxin Atsou, Kokuvi Ayers, Dieter Guyot, Patricia Sasane, Medha Mojebi, Ali Kuznik, Andreas |
author_sort | Paul, Eleanor |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Most cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (CSCCs) can be treated with surgical excision or radiation; however, approximately 1% of patients develop advanced disease. In 2018, the FDA approved cemiplimab-rwlc as the first programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody for the treatment of patients with metastatic CSCC or locally advanced CSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation. In June 2020, pembrolizumab, another PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was approved for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic CSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or radiation. We previously reported on the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs historical standard of care for the treatment of advanced CSCC from a US perspective. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for patients with advanced CSCC in the United States. METHODS: A “partitioned survival” framework was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab. Clinical inputs were based on the most recent data cut of the phase 2 trials for cemiplimab (EMPOWER-CSCC-1; NCT02760498) and pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-629). Progression-free survival and overall survival were extrapolated using parametric models until all patients had progressed or died. Health state utilities were derived from data collected in the EMPOWER-CSCC-1 trial. Costs included drug acquisition, drug administration, disease management, terminal care, and adverse events and were based on published 2020 US list prices. To assess model uncertainty, 1-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted, alongside scenario analyses evaluating key modeling assumptions. RESULTS: In the base case, cemiplimab resulted in an incremental gain of 3.44 life-years (discounted) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $130,329 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) vs pembrolizumab. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY, PSA indicated a 71% probability that cemiplimab is cost-effective when compared with pembrolizumab. Scenario analysis resulted in ICERs ranging from $115,909 to $187,374. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that cemiplimab is a cost-effective treatment for patients with advanced CSCC, compared with pembrolizumab. These results should be interpreted cautiously in the absence of head-to-head trials; however, in the absence of such data, these results can be used to inform health care decisions over resource allocation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10394223 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103942232023-08-03 Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma Paul, Eleanor Konidaris, Gerasimos Cope, Shannon Chen, Chieh-I Keeping, Sam Xu, Yingxin Atsou, Kokuvi Ayers, Dieter Guyot, Patricia Sasane, Medha Mojebi, Ali Kuznik, Andreas J Manag Care Spec Pharm Research BACKGROUND: Most cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (CSCCs) can be treated with surgical excision or radiation; however, approximately 1% of patients develop advanced disease. In 2018, the FDA approved cemiplimab-rwlc as the first programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody for the treatment of patients with metastatic CSCC or locally advanced CSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation. In June 2020, pembrolizumab, another PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was approved for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic CSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or radiation. We previously reported on the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs historical standard of care for the treatment of advanced CSCC from a US perspective. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for patients with advanced CSCC in the United States. METHODS: A “partitioned survival” framework was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab. Clinical inputs were based on the most recent data cut of the phase 2 trials for cemiplimab (EMPOWER-CSCC-1; NCT02760498) and pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-629). Progression-free survival and overall survival were extrapolated using parametric models until all patients had progressed or died. Health state utilities were derived from data collected in the EMPOWER-CSCC-1 trial. Costs included drug acquisition, drug administration, disease management, terminal care, and adverse events and were based on published 2020 US list prices. To assess model uncertainty, 1-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted, alongside scenario analyses evaluating key modeling assumptions. RESULTS: In the base case, cemiplimab resulted in an incremental gain of 3.44 life-years (discounted) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $130,329 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) vs pembrolizumab. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY, PSA indicated a 71% probability that cemiplimab is cost-effective when compared with pembrolizumab. Scenario analysis resulted in ICERs ranging from $115,909 to $187,374. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that cemiplimab is a cost-effective treatment for patients with advanced CSCC, compared with pembrolizumab. These results should be interpreted cautiously in the absence of head-to-head trials; however, in the absence of such data, these results can be used to inform health care decisions over resource allocation. Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 2021-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10394223/ /pubmed/34351214 http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2021.21164 Text en Copyright © 2021, Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Paul, Eleanor Konidaris, Gerasimos Cope, Shannon Chen, Chieh-I Keeping, Sam Xu, Yingxin Atsou, Kokuvi Ayers, Dieter Guyot, Patricia Sasane, Medha Mojebi, Ali Kuznik, Andreas Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma |
title | Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma |
title_full | Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma |
title_fullStr | Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma |
title_short | Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10394223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34351214 http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2021.21164 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pauleleanor costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT konidarisgerasimos costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT copeshannon costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT chenchiehi costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT keepingsam costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT xuyingxin costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT atsoukokuvi costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT ayersdieter costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT guyotpatricia costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT sasanemedha costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT mojebiali costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma AT kuznikandreas costeffectivenessanalysisofcemiplimabvspembrolizumabfortreatmentofadvancedcutaneoussquamouscellcarcinoma |