Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Urol Oncol. 2019 Mar;37(3):180.e11-180.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.11.016. Epub 2018 Dec 6.
Our purpose was to evaluate the effect of PD-L1 testing on the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for second-line treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma in the bladder from the U.S. societal perspective.
We developed a microsimulation model to compare 3 treatment strategies: (1) treat all patients with standard-of-care chemotherapy, (2) treat all patients with pembrolizumab, and (3) treat patients with PD-L1-positive tumors at a ≥1% expression threshold with pembrolizumab, and all others with standard-of-care chemotherapy. Additionally, we performed a budget impact analysis based on the projected number of urothelial carcinoma patients eligible for second-line pembrolizumab treatment.
Treating all patients with chemotherapy resulted in a mean cost of $17,232 and mean effect of 0.43 quality-adjusted life-years. The PD-L1 test strategy was the most efficient strategy, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $122,933/quality-adjusted life-year. Treating all patients with pembrolizumab resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $197,383/quality-adjusted life-year compared to the PD-L1 test strategy. The PD-L1 test strategy would produce an incremental budget impact of $14.9 million in the first year of use compared to chemotherapy, increasing to $16.5 million in the fifth year of use. Treating all patients with pembrolizumab would produce an incremental budget impact of $19.6 million compared to the PD-L1 test strategy in its first year of use, increasing to $20.9 million by year 5.
Pembrolizumab was not cost-effective in either strategy based on a $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year willingness-to-pay threshold. Using PD-L1 testing to select for patients who may have better associated outcomes may improve the affordability of pembrolizumab.
从美国社会角度出发,我们旨在评估 PD-L1 检测对帕博利珠单抗二线治疗晚期膀胱癌的成本效益的影响。
我们开发了一个微观模拟模型,以比较 3 种治疗策略:(1)对所有患者采用标准护理化疗;(2)对所有患者采用帕博利珠单抗治疗;(3)对 PD-L1 阳性肿瘤(表达阈值≥1%)患者采用帕博利珠单抗治疗,其余患者采用标准护理化疗。此外,我们还根据预计有资格接受二线帕博利珠单抗治疗的尿路上皮癌患者数量进行了预算影响分析。
对所有患者采用化疗治疗导致平均成本为 17232 美元,平均效果为 0.43 个质量调整生命年。PD-L1 检测策略是最有效的策略,增量成本效益比为每质量调整生命年 122933 美元。与 PD-L1 检测策略相比,对所有患者采用帕博利珠单抗治疗的增量成本效益比为每质量调整生命年 197383 美元。与化疗相比,在第一年使用 PD-L1 检测策略会产生 1490 万美元的增量预算影响,在第五年使用时增加到 1650 万美元。在第一年使用时,对所有患者采用帕博利珠单抗治疗会产生与 PD-L1 检测策略相比增加 1960 万美元的增量预算影响,到第五年时增加到 2090 万美元。
基于 10 万美元/质量调整生命年的意愿支付阈值,在这两种策略中,帕博利珠单抗均不具有成本效益。使用 PD-L1 检测来选择可能具有更好相关结果的患者可能会提高帕博利珠单抗的可负担性。