Cargando…

Indirect Treatment Comparison of Nivolumab Versus Observation or Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Melanoma Using Pooled Clinical Trial Data

INTRODUCTION: Nivolumab has been approved in patients with melanoma with lymph node involvement or metastatic disease who have undergone complete resection, in the adjuvant setting. A pivotal trial compared nivolumab with ipilimumab; however, no head-to-head trial exists comparing nivolumab to obser...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Freeman, Morganna, Betts, Keith A., Jiang, Shan, Du, Ella X., Gupte-Singh, Komal, Lu, Yichen, Rao, Sumati, Shoushtari, Alexander N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6822822/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31440980
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01060-y
_version_ 1783464414622515200
author Freeman, Morganna
Betts, Keith A.
Jiang, Shan
Du, Ella X.
Gupte-Singh, Komal
Lu, Yichen
Rao, Sumati
Shoushtari, Alexander N.
author_facet Freeman, Morganna
Betts, Keith A.
Jiang, Shan
Du, Ella X.
Gupte-Singh, Komal
Lu, Yichen
Rao, Sumati
Shoushtari, Alexander N.
author_sort Freeman, Morganna
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Nivolumab has been approved in patients with melanoma with lymph node involvement or metastatic disease who have undergone complete resection, in the adjuvant setting. A pivotal trial compared nivolumab with ipilimumab; however, no head-to-head trial exists comparing nivolumab to observation, a common comparator in the adjuvant setting. Here, we compared the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of nivolumab with observation or ipilimumab as adjuvant therapies in resected stage IIIB/C melanoma. METHODS: Patient data were pooled from the EORTC 18071 and CheckMate 238 trials using propensity score weighting and adjusting for cross-trial differences. Number needed to treat (NNT) and costs per recurrence-free life-month (RFLM) at 12, 16, 18, and 24 months (as data allowed) were estimated. Costs included drug acquisition, administration costs, and direct medical costs. Sensitivity analyses including patients with stage IIIB/C and resected stage IV melanoma were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 1287 patients (278 nivolumab, 365 observation, and 644 ipilimumab) with resected stage IIIB/C melanoma were pooled. NNTs to achieve one additional recurrence-free survivor with nivolumab versus observation were 3.93 at 12 months and 3.42 at 24 months; NNTs for nivolumab versus ipilimumab were 7.97 at 12 months and 6.43 at 24 months. Mean drug costs per RFLM were lower for nivolumab at 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively (nivolumab: $13,447, $9462, and $7370; ipilimumab: $52,734, $40,484, and $33,875). Mean medical costs per RFLM were the lowest for nivolumab versus observation or ipilimumab at 12 months ($449 versus $674 or $1531) and 16 months ($383 versus $808 or $1316). The sensitivity analysis results were consistent with the base case. CONCLUSION: For resected melanoma, adjuvant nivolumab is both clinically effective and cost-effective compared with observation or ipilimumab. Adjuvant nivolumab was associated with a lower drug cost per RFLM compared with ipilimumab, and a lower medical cost compared with observation. Future analyses incorporating long-term follow-up data may help increase understanding of the economic impact of nivolumab in the adjuvant setting. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-019-01060-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6822822
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68228222019-11-06 Indirect Treatment Comparison of Nivolumab Versus Observation or Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Melanoma Using Pooled Clinical Trial Data Freeman, Morganna Betts, Keith A. Jiang, Shan Du, Ella X. Gupte-Singh, Komal Lu, Yichen Rao, Sumati Shoushtari, Alexander N. Adv Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: Nivolumab has been approved in patients with melanoma with lymph node involvement or metastatic disease who have undergone complete resection, in the adjuvant setting. A pivotal trial compared nivolumab with ipilimumab; however, no head-to-head trial exists comparing nivolumab to observation, a common comparator in the adjuvant setting. Here, we compared the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of nivolumab with observation or ipilimumab as adjuvant therapies in resected stage IIIB/C melanoma. METHODS: Patient data were pooled from the EORTC 18071 and CheckMate 238 trials using propensity score weighting and adjusting for cross-trial differences. Number needed to treat (NNT) and costs per recurrence-free life-month (RFLM) at 12, 16, 18, and 24 months (as data allowed) were estimated. Costs included drug acquisition, administration costs, and direct medical costs. Sensitivity analyses including patients with stage IIIB/C and resected stage IV melanoma were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 1287 patients (278 nivolumab, 365 observation, and 644 ipilimumab) with resected stage IIIB/C melanoma were pooled. NNTs to achieve one additional recurrence-free survivor with nivolumab versus observation were 3.93 at 12 months and 3.42 at 24 months; NNTs for nivolumab versus ipilimumab were 7.97 at 12 months and 6.43 at 24 months. Mean drug costs per RFLM were lower for nivolumab at 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively (nivolumab: $13,447, $9462, and $7370; ipilimumab: $52,734, $40,484, and $33,875). Mean medical costs per RFLM were the lowest for nivolumab versus observation or ipilimumab at 12 months ($449 versus $674 or $1531) and 16 months ($383 versus $808 or $1316). The sensitivity analysis results were consistent with the base case. CONCLUSION: For resected melanoma, adjuvant nivolumab is both clinically effective and cost-effective compared with observation or ipilimumab. Adjuvant nivolumab was associated with a lower drug cost per RFLM compared with ipilimumab, and a lower medical cost compared with observation. Future analyses incorporating long-term follow-up data may help increase understanding of the economic impact of nivolumab in the adjuvant setting. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-019-01060-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Healthcare 2019-08-22 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6822822/ /pubmed/31440980 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01060-y Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Freeman, Morganna
Betts, Keith A.
Jiang, Shan
Du, Ella X.
Gupte-Singh, Komal
Lu, Yichen
Rao, Sumati
Shoushtari, Alexander N.
Indirect Treatment Comparison of Nivolumab Versus Observation or Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Melanoma Using Pooled Clinical Trial Data
title Indirect Treatment Comparison of Nivolumab Versus Observation or Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Melanoma Using Pooled Clinical Trial Data
title_full Indirect Treatment Comparison of Nivolumab Versus Observation or Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Melanoma Using Pooled Clinical Trial Data
title_fullStr Indirect Treatment Comparison of Nivolumab Versus Observation or Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Melanoma Using Pooled Clinical Trial Data
title_full_unstemmed Indirect Treatment Comparison of Nivolumab Versus Observation or Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Melanoma Using Pooled Clinical Trial Data
title_short Indirect Treatment Comparison of Nivolumab Versus Observation or Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Melanoma Using Pooled Clinical Trial Data
title_sort indirect treatment comparison of nivolumab versus observation or ipilimumab as adjuvant therapy in resected melanoma using pooled clinical trial data
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6822822/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31440980
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01060-y
work_keys_str_mv AT freemanmorganna indirecttreatmentcomparisonofnivolumabversusobservationoripilimumabasadjuvanttherapyinresectedmelanomausingpooledclinicaltrialdata
AT bettskeitha indirecttreatmentcomparisonofnivolumabversusobservationoripilimumabasadjuvanttherapyinresectedmelanomausingpooledclinicaltrialdata
AT jiangshan indirecttreatmentcomparisonofnivolumabversusobservationoripilimumabasadjuvanttherapyinresectedmelanomausingpooledclinicaltrialdata
AT duellax indirecttreatmentcomparisonofnivolumabversusobservationoripilimumabasadjuvanttherapyinresectedmelanomausingpooledclinicaltrialdata
AT guptesinghkomal indirecttreatmentcomparisonofnivolumabversusobservationoripilimumabasadjuvanttherapyinresectedmelanomausingpooledclinicaltrialdata
AT luyichen indirecttreatmentcomparisonofnivolumabversusobservationoripilimumabasadjuvanttherapyinresectedmelanomausingpooledclinicaltrialdata
AT raosumati indirecttreatmentcomparisonofnivolumabversusobservationoripilimumabasadjuvanttherapyinresectedmelanomausingpooledclinicaltrialdata
AT shoushtarialexandern indirecttreatmentcomparisonofnivolumabversusobservationoripilimumabasadjuvanttherapyinresectedmelanomausingpooledclinicaltrialdata