Medical Decision and Economic Group, Department of Pharmacy, Ren Ji Hospital, South Campus, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Oncologist. 2019 Mar;24(3):349-357. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0150. Epub 2018 Sep 26.
The objective of this study was to assess cost and effectiveness of osimertinib in treating newly diagnosed advanced non-small cell lung cancer with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation from a public payer's perspective in the U.S. and China.
Markov models were developed to compare three treatment strategies: first-line use of osimertinib, first-line use of the standard first-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) followed by the second-line use of osimertinib, and the standard first-generation EGFR-TKI therapy (standard care [SOC]). Clinical data, cost, and utility data were mainly derived from published literatures. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) between the treatments.
The resultant incremental cost per QALY gained for the first-line osimertinib versus SOC was $312,903 in the U.S. and $41,512 in China. The incremental cost per QALY for the second-line osimertinib versus SOC was $284,532 in the U.S. and $38,860 in China. The probability of the SOC strategy being cost-effective is 1.0 if the willingness to pay threshold is below $150,000/QALY in the U.S. and below $30,000/QALY in China.
Osimertinib as first-line treatment could gain more health benefits in comparison with standard EGFR-TKIs or second-line use of osimertinib. However, because of the high cost of treatment, the cost-effectiveness analyses were not in favor of the first-line use of osimertinib from a public payer's perspective in the U.S. and China.
Osimertinib as first-line treatment yielded the greatest health outcomes but is not a cost-effective strategy for lung cancer in the U.S. and China. The price of osimertinib has a substantial impact on economic outcomes.
本研究旨在从美国和中国的公共支付方角度,评估奥希替尼治疗新诊断的携带表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)突变的晚期非小细胞肺癌的成本和效果。
采用 Markov 模型比较三种治疗策略:一线使用奥希替尼、一线使用标准第一代 EGFR-酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(EGFR-TKI)后二线使用奥希替尼、以及标准第一代 EGFR-TKI 治疗(标准治疗[SOC])。临床数据、成本和效用数据主要来源于已发表的文献。采用确定性和概率敏感性分析评估治疗方案间增量成本-质量调整生命年(QALY)的稳健性。
与 SOC 相比,美国一线奥希替尼治疗的增量成本-每 QALY 获益为 312903 美元,中国为 41512 美元。与 SOC 相比,二线奥希替尼治疗的增量成本-每 QALY 获益为 284532 美元,中国为 38860 美元。如果美国的意愿支付阈值低于 150000 美元/QALY,中国低于 30000 美元/QALY,SOC 策略具有成本效益的概率为 1.0。
与标准 EGFR-TKI 或二线奥希替尼相比,奥希替尼作为一线治疗可获得更多的健康益处。然而,由于治疗费用较高,从美国和中国的公共支付方角度来看,奥希替尼作为一线治疗的成本效益分析并不支持。
奥希替尼作为一线治疗可带来最大的健康获益,但在美国和中国,奥希替尼作为一线治疗对肺癌来说并不是一种具有成本效益的策略。奥希替尼的价格对经济结果有重大影响。