Cost-Effectiveness of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Endometrial Cancer
By Melike Belenli Gümüş
July 29, 2024
Introduction
Endometrial cancer (EC) remains a significant health concern in the US, with 66,200 new cases and 13,030 deaths projected for 2023. The cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) like pembrolizumab and dostarlimab in treating advanced EC is crucial for healthcare decision-making. A recent study published in Journal of Gynecologic Oncology examines the economic viability of these treatments, focusing on their impact on survival rates and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
The Burden of Endometrial Cancer
Endometrial cancer is the most common gynaecological malignancy in the US. Despite early-stage diagnosis in 67% of patients, 10-15% present with advanced disease, showing a 5-year survival rate of 15-17%. The prognosis varies significantly based on the molecular subtype of the tumour. Approximately 80% of patients have mismatch repair-proficient microsatellite-stable (pMMR-MSS) tumours, while 30% have mismatch repair-deficient microsatellite instability-high (dMMR-MSI-H) tumours.
Treatment Options and Survival Outcomes
First-line treatment for advanced EC typically involves carboplatin plus paclitaxel. However, the prognosis remains poor, with median progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS) rates of just 1 and 3 years, respectively. Recent advancements in ICIs, particularly pembrolizumab and dostarlimab, have shown promise in improving survival outcomes. Two large phase 3 trials, RUBY and NRG-GY018, demonstrated significant benefits of combining ICIs with chemotherapy.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Zhu et al. developed a model to compare the cost-effectiveness of dostarlimab plus chemotherapy (DC), pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (PC), and chemotherapy alone. The model used a 20-year time horizon and considered various costs, including drug administration, follow-up, monitoring, and adverse event management. The primary outcomes included total costs, life-years (LYs), QALYs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
Key Findings
The analysis revealed that DC and PC treatments significantly improved survival outcomes compared to chemotherapy alone. For pMMR-MSS patients, DC treatment extended survival by 1.76 LYs and provided an additional 1.38 QALYs at an ICER of $234,527/QALY. In contrast, PC treatment extended survival by 0.31 LYs and provided an additional 0.23 QALYs at an ICER of $974,177/QALY.
For dMMR-MSI-H patients, DC treatment extended survival by 5.52 LYs and provided an additional 4.36 QALYs at an ICER of $135,165/QALY. PC treatment extended survival by 2.69 LYs and provided an additional 2.15 QALYs at an ICER of $266,423/QALY. The cost-effectiveness of DC compared to PC was $86,671/QALY for pMMR-MSS patients and $7,866/QALY for dMMR-MSI-H patients.
Based on recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO) and prior publications, willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold waws set to $150,000/QALY to assess the cost-effectiveness of DC and PC treatments for advanced EC. The findings suggest that DC is the most cost-effective option for the dMMR-MSI-H population and may also be justified for the pMMR-MSS population based on the health benefits it provides. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve demonstrated that the cost-effectiveness of DC treatment increases as the WTP threshold is raised.
Figure 1: The cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for DC, PC, and chemotherapy strategy in the pMMR-MSS population (A) and dMMR-MSI-H population (B), respectively.
Sensitivity and Subgroup Analyses
Sensitivity analyses indicated that the prices of ICIs, costs of adverse event management, and risk of adverse events significantly influenced ICER results. However, these variables did not alter the overall conclusions. Subgroup analyses for the dMMR-MSI-H population showed consistent benefits across different patient groups.
Figure 2: The one-way sensitivity analyses for DC strategy compared to PC strategy in the pMMR-MSS population (A) and dMMR-MSI-H population (B), respectively.
Conclusion
The cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors in treating advanced endometrial cancer varies based on the molecular subtype of the tumour. While both DC and PC treatments offer significant survival benefits, DC appears more cost-effective, particularly for dMMR-MSI-H patients. These findings can guide clinicians, policymakers, and patients in making informed healthcare decisions.
🌟 What does the EMA’s orphan drug designation for allopurinol mean for those impacted by Marfan syndrome?
This groundbreaking move highlights a significant step forward in tackling rare diseases, offering hope to patients with limited treatment options. Allopurinol, traditionally used for gout, shows promise in addressing life-threatening aortic complications associated with Marfan syndrome, thanks to its antioxidant properties.
Dive into the implications of this development for healthcare innovation, patient access, and the future of rare disease treatment!
💡 Are we witnessing a paradigm shift in hemophilia treatment?
The recent recommendation from NICE for marstacimab as a novel therapy for severe hemophilia B is a game-changer. With its ability to provide effective prophylaxis while potentially lowering treatment costs, this could reshape patient care and health economics in this space.
Dive into the implications this has for patients and healthcare providers, and why marstacimab’s approval could be a pivotal moment for hemophilia management.
🌍 Are we witnessing a rise in HPV-related cancer in South Africa?
A recent analysis of data from the South African National Cancer Registry highlights concerning trends: while cervical cancer rates are declining, there’s an alarming rise in non-cervical anogenital cancers. This underscores the urgent need for enhanced cancer prevention and access to efficient healthcare services in the country.
Dive into the findings and explore the implications for health systems and policies.
When you partner with Syenza, it’s like a Nuclear Fusion.
Our expertise are combined with yours, and we contribute clinical expertise and advanced degrees in
health policy, health economics, systems analysis, public finance, business, and project management.
You’ll also feel our high-impact global and local perspectives with cultural intelligence.
