Department of Cancer center, the First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Department of pharmacy, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Cancer Med. 2021 Mar;10(6):1964-1974. doi: 10.1002/cam4.3733. Epub 2021 Feb 24.
Recent studies showed prolonged survival for advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with both monotherapies and combined therapies. However, high costs limit clinical applications. Thus, we conducted this cost-effectiveness analysis to explore an optimal first-line treatment for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients.
Survival data were extracted from six clinical trials, including ARCHER1050 (dacomitinib vs. gefitinib); FLAURA (osimertinib vs. gefitinib/erlotinib); JO25567 and NEJ026 (bevacizumab +erlotinib vs. erlotinib); NEJ009 (gefitinib +chemotherapy vs. gefitinib); and NCT02148380 (gefitinib +chemotherapy vs. gefitinib vs. chemotherapy) trials. Cost-related data were obtained from hospitals and published literature. The effect parameter (quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) was the reflection of both survival and utility. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER), and net benefit were calculated, and the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at $30828/QALY from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Sensitivity analysis was performed to explore the stability of results.
We compared treatment groups with control groups in each trial. ICERs were $1897750.74/QALY (ARCHER1050), $416560.02/QALY (FLAURA), -$477607.48/QALY (JO25567), -$464326.66/QALY (NEJ026), -$277121.22/QALY (NEJ009), -$399360.94/QALY (gefitinib as comparison, NCT02148380), and -$170733.05/QALY (chemotherapy as comparison, NCT02148380). Moreover, ACER and net benefit showed that the combination of EGFR-TKI with chemotherapy and osimertinib was of more economic benefit following first-generation EGFR-TKIs. Sensitivity analyses showed that the impact of utilities and monotherapy could be cost-effective with a 50% cost reduction.
First-generation EGFR-TKI therapy remained the most cost-effective treatment option for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients. Our results could serve as both a reference for both clinical practice and the formulation of medical insurance reimbursement.
最近的研究表明,接受单药治疗和联合治疗的晚期表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)突变型非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者的生存时间延长。然而,高昂的成本限制了临床应用。因此,我们进行了这项成本效益分析,以探索晚期 EGFR 突变型 NSCLC 患者的最佳一线治疗方法。
从六项临床试验中提取生存数据,包括 ARCHER1050 研究(达克替尼对比吉非替尼);FLAURA 研究(奥希替尼对比吉非替尼/厄洛替尼);JO25567 和 NEJ026 研究(贝伐珠单抗+厄洛替尼对比厄洛替尼);NEJ009 研究(吉非替尼+化疗对比吉非替尼);以及 NCT02148380 研究(吉非替尼+化疗对比吉非替尼对比化疗)。成本相关数据来自医院和已发表的文献。效果参数(质量调整生命年[QALY])反映了生存和效用。计算了增量成本效益比(ICER)、平均成本效益比(ACER)和净收益,并从中国医疗保健系统的角度设定了 30828 美元/QALY 的支付意愿(WTP)阈值。进行敏感性分析以探索结果的稳定性。
我们在每项试验中比较了治疗组与对照组。ICER 分别为:ARCHER1050 研究中为 1897750.74 美元/QALY;FLAURA 研究中为 416560.02 美元/QALY;JO25567 研究中为 -477607.48 美元/QALY;NEJ026 研究中为 -464326.66 美元/QALY;NEJ009 研究中为 -277121.22 美元/QALY;NCT02148380 研究中吉非替尼作为对照为 -399360.94 美元/QALY;以及 NCT02148380 研究中化疗作为对照为 -170733.05 美元/QALY。此外,ACER 和净收益表明,在第一代 EGFR-TKI 之后,EGFR-TKI 联合化疗和奥希替尼具有更高的经济效益。敏感性分析表明,效用和单药治疗的影响可能具有成本效益,成本降低 50%。
第一代 EGFR-TKI 治疗仍然是晚期 EGFR 突变型 NSCLC 患者最具成本效益的治疗选择。我们的研究结果可以为临床实践和医疗保险报销政策的制定提供参考。