A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors
Background - Escalating healthcare costs are necessitating the practice of value-based oncology. It is crucial to critically evaluate the economic impact of influential but expensive therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). To date, no systematic assessment of the cost-effectiveness (C...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article (Journal) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2018 Nov 23
|
| In: |
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
Year: 2018, Volume: 6, Issue: 1, Pages: 128 |
| ISSN: | 2051-1426 |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s40425-018-0442-7 |
| Online Access: | Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40425-018-0442-7 Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6251215/ 
|
| Author Notes: | Vivek Verma, Tanja Sprave, Waqar Haque, Charles B. Simone II, Joe Y. Chang, James W. Welsh and Charles R. Thomas Jr |
| Summary: | Background - Escalating healthcare costs are necessitating the practice of value-based oncology. It is crucial to critically evaluate the economic impact of influential but expensive therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). To date, no systematic assessment of the cost-effectiveness (CE) of ICIs has been performed. - - Methods - PRISMA-guided systematic searches of the PubMed database were conducted. Studies of head/neck (n = 3), lung (n = 5), genitourinary (n = 4), and melanoma (n = 8) malignancies treated with ICIs were evaluated. The reference willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was $100,000/QALY. - - Results - Nivolumab was not cost-effective over chemotherapy for recurrent/metastatic head/neck cancers (HNCs). For non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), nivolumab was not cost-effective for a general cohort, but increased PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in CE. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for both previously treated and newly-diagnosed metastatic NSCLC. For genitourinary cancers (GUCs, renal cell and bladder cancers), nivolumab and pembrolizumab were not cost-effective options. Regarding metastatic/unresected melanoma, ipilimumab monotherapy is less cost-effective than nivolumab, nivolumab/ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab. The addition of ipilimumab to nivolumab monotherapy was not adequately cost-effective. Pembrolizumab or nivolumab monotherapy offered comparable CE profiles. - - Conclusions - With limited data and from the reference WTP, nivolumab was not cost-effective for HNCs. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for NSCLC; although not the case for nivolumab, applying PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in adequate CE. Most data for nivolumab and pembrolizumab in GUCs did not point towards adequate CE. Contrary to ipilimumab, either nivolumab or pembrolizumab is cost-effective for melanoma. Despite these conclusions, it cannot be overstated that careful patient selection is critical for CE. Future publication of CE investigations and clinical trials (along with longer follow-up of existing data) could substantially alter conclusions from this analysis. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Gesehen am 14.04.2020 |
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 2051-1426 |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s40425-018-0442-7 |