Department of Hematology/Oncology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Department of Hematology/Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jan 4;4(1):e2033441. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.33441.
The BEACON trial showed that combination therapy with encorafenib (BRAF inhibitor) and cetuximab (EGFR inhibitor) was associated with prolonged overall survival compared with standard chemotherapy in patients with metastatic BRAF variant colorectal cancer. However, the cost-effectiveness of using these agents in this clinical setting is unknown.
To create a cost-effectiveness model to compare doublet therapy (encorafenib plus cetuximab) with standard chemotherapy (cetuximab plus irinotecan or cetuximab plus folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan) in treating patients with metastatic BRAF variant colorectal cancer.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This economic evaluation constructed a Markov model to compare the lifetime cost and utility of doublet therapy and standard chemotherapy. Parametric survival modeling was used to extrapolate the effectiveness of each line of therapy from large clinical trials. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed the uncertainty in the model. Patients mirrored the cohorts in the BEACON trial: they had metastatic BRAF variant colorectal cancer and were followed up as they progressed through multiple lines of therapy, best supportive care, and death. Data collection and data analysis were performed from November 15, 2019, to July 14, 2020.
The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which was calculated using the cumulative cost and effectiveness in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), of doublet therapy compared with standard chemotherapy.
The model patient cohort had a mean age of 61 years, and 53% of the patients were women, 66% had 1 previous line of therapy, and 8% had high microsatellite instability. Doublet therapy was associated with an improvement of 0.15 QALYs compared with standard chemotherapy. However, the incremental cost of doublet therapy was $78 233, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $523 374 per QALY gained. Concomitant decreases in the price of encorafenib and cetuximab are needed to achieve cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per QALY gained.
This study found that doublet therapy for metastatic BRAF variant colorectal cancer was unlikely to be cost-effective under current pricing. Cost-effectiveness needs to be considered in clinical trial design, particularly when combining new therapies with non-cost-effective treatments that are coadministered without a fixed duration.
BEACON 试验表明,与标准化疗相比,联合治疗(BRAF 抑制剂 encorafenib 和 EGFR 抑制剂 cetuximab)可延长转移性 BRAF 变异型结直肠癌患者的总生存期。然而,在这种临床环境下使用这些药物的成本效益尚不清楚。
创建一个成本效益模型,以比较双联疗法(encorafenib 加 cetuximab)与标准化疗(cetuximab 加伊立替康或 cetuximab 加亚叶酸、氟尿嘧啶和伊立替康)在治疗转移性 BRAF 变异型结直肠癌患者中的疗效。
设计、设置和参与者:本经济评估构建了一个 Markov 模型,以比较双联疗法和标准化疗的终生成本和疗效。参数生存模型用于从大型临床试验中推断每条治疗线的疗效。单因素和概率敏感性分析评估了模型的不确定性。患者与 BEACON 试验中的队列相匹配:他们患有转移性 BRAF 变异型结直肠癌,并随着他们在多条治疗线、最佳支持治疗和死亡中进展而进行随访。数据收集和数据分析于 2019 年 11 月 15 日至 2020 年 7 月 14 日进行。
主要结果是比较双联疗法与标准化疗的增量成本效益比,使用累积成本和质量调整生命年(QALY)中的疗效来计算。
模型患者队列的平均年龄为 61 岁,53%的患者为女性,66%的患者有 1 条既往治疗线,8%的患者有高微卫星不稳定性。与标准化疗相比,双联疗法可使 QALY 提高 0.15。然而,双联疗法的增量成本为 78233 美元,导致每获得一个 QALY 的增量成本效益比为 523374 美元。需要降低 encorafenib 和 cetuximab 的价格,才能在每获得一个 QALY 的支付意愿阈值为 15 万美元时达到成本效益。
本研究发现,在当前定价下,转移性 BRAF 变异型结直肠癌的双联疗法不太可能具有成本效益。在临床试验设计中需要考虑成本效益,特别是当将新疗法与非成本效益的联合治疗联合使用且没有固定的持续时间时。