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 U.S. withdrawing from the WHO mean for global health?*
President Trump’s executive order to begin the withdrawal process raises serious concerns about the future of global health security. From financial disparities to a shift in international partnerships, the implications could reshape our collective ability to combat pandemics and health crises.
Dive into our article to understand the potential impacts on health outcomes and the quest for new alliances.
The European Medicines Agency’s PRAC is currently reviewing the potential risk of non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION) associated with semaglutide-containing medicines, including popular treatments like Ozempic and Wegovy. With recent studies yielding conflicting evidence, this review is crucial for patient safety and the future of these therapies.
Read the full article to understand the implications and what this could mean for healthcare providers and patients alike!
💡 *Are single-visit cervical cancer screenings the key to better health outcomes in high HIV prevalence areas?*
A recent study from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa reveals that repeat single-visit cervical cancer screening using HPV DNA testing is not only the most effective but also the most cost-effective approach for women living with HIV. This aligns with WHO recommendations for comprehensive cervical cancer elimination strategies.
Explore the insights and implications of this vital research that could transform cervical cancer prevention in resource-limited settings.
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.
