文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

西妥昔单抗对比帕博利珠单抗治疗晚期皮肤鳞状细胞癌的成本效果分析。

Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

机构信息

PRECISIONheor, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Sanofi, Reading, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021 Nov;27(11):1513-1525. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2021.21164. Epub 2021 Aug 5.


DOI:10.18553/jmcp.2021.21164
PMID:34351214
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10394223/
Abstract

Most cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (CSCCs) can be treated with surgical excision or radiation; however, approximately 1% of patients develop advanced disease. In 2018, the FDA approved cemiplimab-rwlc as the first programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody for the treatment of patients with metastatic CSCC or locally advanced CSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation. In June 2020, pembrolizumab, another PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was approved for the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic CSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or radiation. We previously reported on the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs historical standard of care for the treatment of advanced CSCC from a US perspective. To estimate the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for patients with advanced CSCC in the United States. A "partitioned survival" framework was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab. Clinical inputs were based on the most recent data cut of the phase 2 trials for cemiplimab (EMPOWER-CSCC-1; NCT02760498) and pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-629). Progression-free survival and overall survival were extrapolated using parametric models until all patients had progressed or died. Health state utilities were derived from data collected in the EMPOWER-CSCC-1 trial. Costs included drug acquisition, drug administration, disease management, terminal care, and adverse events and were based on published 2020 US list prices. To assess model uncertainty, 1-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted, alongside scenario analyses evaluating key modeling assumptions. In the base case, cemiplimab resulted in an incremental gain of 3.44 life-years (discounted) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $130,329 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) vs pembrolizumab. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY, PSA indicated a 71% probability that cemiplimab is cost-effective when compared with pembrolizumab. Scenario analysis resulted in ICERs ranging from $115,909 to $187,374. Findings suggest that cemiplimab is a cost-effective treatment for patients with advanced CSCC, compared with pembrolizumab. These results should be interpreted cautiously in the absence of head-to-head trials; however, in the absence of such data, these results can be used to inform health care decisions over resource allocation. This study was supported by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi. Paul, Cope, Keeping, Mojebi, and Ayers are employees of PRECISIONheor, which received funding to produce this work. Chen, Kuznik, and Xu are employees and stockholders of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Sasane is an employee and stockholder of Sanofi, Inc. Konidaris, Atsou, and Guyot are employees of Sanofi, Inc. The authors were responsible for all content and editorial decisions and received no honoraria related to the development of this publication.

摘要

大多数皮肤鳞状细胞癌 (CSCC) 可以通过手术切除或放射治疗进行治疗;然而,约有 1%的患者发展为晚期疾病。2018 年,FDA 批准 cemiplimab-rwlc 作为首个用于治疗不适合根治性手术或根治性放疗的转移性 CSCC 或局部晚期 CSCC 患者的程序性细胞死亡-1 (PD-1) 单克隆抗体。2020 年 6 月,另一种 PD-1 单克隆抗体 pembrolizumab 获批用于治疗不适合根治性手术或放疗的复发性或转移性 CSCC 患者。我们之前从美国的角度报告了 cemiplimab 与历史标准治疗晚期 CSCC 的成本效益。 评估 cemiplimab 与 pembrolizumab 治疗美国晚期 CSCC 的成本效益。 使用“分区生存”框架评估 cemiplimab 与 pembrolizumab 的成本效益。临床输入基于 cemiplimab(EMPOWER-CSCC-1;NCT02760498)和 pembrolizumab(KEYNOTE-629)的 2 期试验的最新数据截止日期。无进展生存期和总生存期通过参数模型进行推断,直到所有患者进展或死亡。健康状态效用来自 EMPOWER-CSCC-1 试验中收集的数据。成本包括药物获取、药物管理、疾病管理、终末期护理以及不良事件,并基于已发布的 2020 年美国标价。为了评估模型的不确定性,进行了 1 次敏感性分析和概率敏感性分析(PSA),以及对关键建模假设进行情景分析。 在基线情况下,与 pembrolizumab 相比,cemiplimab 导致额外获得 3.44 个生命年(折扣)和每质量调整生命年 (QALY) 增量成本效益比 (ICER) 为 130,329 美元。在支付意愿阈值为 150,000 美元/QALY 的情况下,PSA 表明 cemiplimab 与 pembrolizumab 相比,具有 71%的成本效益可能性。情景分析导致 ICER 范围在 115,909 美元至 187,374 美元之间。 结果表明,与 pembrolizumab 相比,cemiplimab 是治疗晚期 CSCC 的一种具有成本效益的治疗方法。在没有头对头试验的情况下,应谨慎解释这些结果;然而,在没有此类数据的情况下,这些结果可用于为资源分配提供信息,以帮助医疗保健决策。 这项研究得到了再生元制药公司和赛诺菲的支持。Paul、Cope、Keeping、Mojebi 和 Ayers 是 PRECISIONheor 的员工,该公司获得了开展这项工作的资金。Chen、Kuznik 和 Xu 是再生元制药公司的员工和股东。Sasane 是赛诺菲公司的员工和股东。Konidaris、Atsou 和 Guyot 是赛诺菲公司的员工。作者对所有内容和编辑决策负责,与本出版物的编写无关,他们没有获得任何酬金。

相似文献

[1]
Cost-effectiveness analysis of cemiplimab vs pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021-11

[2]
Assessing the Value of Cemiplimab for Adults With Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Value Health. 2021-3

[3]
Cost-Effectiveness of Cemiplimab Versus Standard of Care in the United States for First-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer With Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Expression ≥50.

Value Health. 2022-2

[4]
Cost-Effectiveness of Pembrolizumab Versus Ipilimumab in Ipilimumab-Naïve Patients with Advanced Melanoma in the United States.

J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017-2

[5]
Cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy for previously untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

J Med Econ. 2020-9

[6]
Cost-effectiveness of Pembrolizumab as Second-line Therapy for the Treatment of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in Sweden.

Eur Urol Oncol. 2020-10

[7]
The cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy or atezolizumab as second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma in the United States.

J Med Econ. 2020-9

[8]
Nivolumab vs Pembrolizumab for Treatment of US Patients With Platinum-Refractory Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Network Meta-analysis and Cost-effectiveness Analysis.

JAMA Netw Open. 2021-5-3

[9]
Cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic NSCLC that expresses high levels of PD-L1 in Switzerland.

Swiss Med Wkly. 2019-12-27

[10]
Pembrolizumab vs cemiplimab for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer with PD-L1 expression levels of at least 50%: A network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Front Oncol. 2022-9-26

引用本文的文献

[1]
Cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab plus chemotherapy vs pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2025-2-1

[2]
Whether and How Disutilities of Adverse Events were Used in the Economic Evaluation of Drug Therapy for Cancer Treatment.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2023-3

[3]
T-box transcription factor 2 mediates antitumor immune response in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma by regulating the expression of programmed death ligand 1.

Skin Res Technol. 2023-1

本文引用的文献

[1]
Assessing the Value of Cemiplimab for Adults With Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Value Health. 2021-3

[2]
Comparative efficacy of cemiplimab versus other systemic treatments for advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

Future Oncol. 2021-2

[3]
Phase II Study of Pembrolizumab As First-Line, Single-Drug Therapy for Patients With Unresectable Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinomas.

J Clin Oncol. 2020-9-10

[4]
Pembrolizumab Monotherapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Single-Arm Phase II Trial (KEYNOTE-629).

J Clin Oncol. 2020-9-1

[5]
Clinical outcomes among unresectable, locally advanced, and metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with systemic therapy.

Cancer Med. 2020-10

[6]
Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: From Biology to Therapy.

Int J Mol Sci. 2020-4-22

[7]
Cetuximab is efficient and safe in patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective, multicentre study.

Oncotarget. 2020-1-28

[8]
Association of Disease Recurrence With Survival Outcomes in Patients With Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck Treated With Multimodality Therapy.

JAMA Dermatol. 2019-4-1

[9]
Efficacy and safety of single-agent pan-human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) inhibitor dacomitinib in locally advanced unresectable or metastatic skin squamous cell cancer.

Eur J Cancer. 2018-5-4

[10]
Erlotinib in the treatment of recurrent or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: A single-arm phase 2 clinical trial.

Cancer. 2018-3-26

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索