Cost–effectiveness of pembrolizumab for second-line treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients with a combined positive score of 10 or more
Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab compared with that of chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients with a combined positive score ≥10. Methods: A Markov model was established to compare the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of different treatment options. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the stability of the model. Results: The increased utility and cost of pembrolizumab were 0.442 QALYs and US$11,826.79 compared with those of chemotherapy. The incremental cost–effectiveness ratio was US$26,757.45/QALY, which was less than the threshold of three-times the GDP per capita. The prices of paclitaxel and pembrolizumab were the most important influencing factors. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab is a cost-effective second-line treatment of ESCC.
Formats available
You can view the full content in the following formats:
References
Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest
1.
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 68(6), 394–424 (2018).
• Provides background on the esophageal cancer.
2.
Zhang HZ, Jin GF, Shen HB. Epidemiologic differences in esophageal cancer between Asian and Western populations. Chin. J. Cancer 31(6), 281–286 (2012).
3.
Zhang L, Li W, Lyu X et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel and cisplatin in lymph node-positive thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Chin. J. Cancer Res. 29(2), 149–155 (2017).
4.
Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology. Guidelines of Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) Esophageal Cancer. People’s Medical Publishing House, Beijing, China (2020).
5.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancers. Version 1. ESOPH-F4 (2022).
6.
Kojima T, Shah MA, Muro K et al. Randomized Phase III KEYNOTE-181 study of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in advanced esophageal cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 38(35), 4138–4148 (2020).
•• Global phase 3 study of pembrolizumab in advanced esophageal cancer.
7.
Liu G. China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations Chinese-English version. China Market Press, Beijing, China (2020).
8.
National Bureau of Statistics. Statistical Bulletin of National Economic and Social Development of the People’s Republic of China in 2019. www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/202002/t20200228_1728913.html
9.
World Health Organization. Choosing interventions that are cost effective (WHO-CHOICE). Cost Effectiveness Thresholds. World Health Organization, Switzerland (2011). www.who.int/choice/en/
10.
Drug Instructions for Pembrolizumab Injection (Keytruda®) in China. Date of approval: 17 June 2020.
•• The clinical data of the Chinese subgroup pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy.
11.
Beck JR, Pauker SG. The Markov process in medical prognosis. Med. Decis. Making 3(4), 419–458 (1983).
12.
Zhou K, Zhou J, Huang J et al. Cost–effectiveness analysis of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 130, 1–4 (2019).
13.
Zhan M, Zheng H, Xu T et al. Cost–effectiveness analysis of additional bevacizumab to pemetrexed plus cisplatin for malignant pleural mesothelioma based on the MAPS trial. Lung Cancer 110, 1–6 (2017).
14.
Le QA, Bae YH, Kang JH. Cost–effectiveness analysis of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2): positive advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 159(3), 565–573 (2016).
15.
Yaozhi.com. Inquiry about drug bidding information [2020-1-15]. https://db.yaozh.com/yaopinzhongbiao
16.
Zeng X, Peng L, Li J et al. Cost–effectiveness of continuation maintenance pemetrexed after cisplatin and pemetrexed chemotherapy for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: estimates from the perspective of the Chinese health care system. Clin. Ther. 35(1), 54–65 (2013).
17.
China Primary Health Care Foundation. Key to Life-Tumor Immunotherapy Patient Assistance Project. http://smzy.ilvzhou.com/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=lists&catid=70&article_id=431
18.
Wu B, Ye M, Chen H, Shen JF. Costs of trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy for HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: an economic evaluation in the Chinese context. Clin. Ther. 34(2), 468–479 (2012).
19.
Zhang L, Hang Y, Liu M et al. First-line durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a cost–effectiveness analysis. Front. Oncol. 10, 602185 (2020).
20.
Büyükkaramikli NC, Blommestein HM, Riemsma R et al. Ramucirumab for treating advanced gastric cancer or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma previously treated with chemotherapy: an Evidence Review Group perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics 35(12), 1211–1221 (2017).
• This is the primary source for utility.
21.
Zhang PF, Xie D, Li Q. Cost–effectiveness analysis of nivolumab in the second-line treatment for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Future Oncol. 16(17), 1189–1198 (2020).
22.
Liu M, Zhang L, Huang Q et al. Cost–effectiveness analysis of ceritinib and alectinib versus crizotinib in the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Manag. Res. 11, 9195–9202 (2019).
23.
Briggs AH, Weinstein MC, Fenwick EA et al. Model parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force Working Group-6. Med. Decis. Making 32(5), 722–732 (2012).
24.
Liubao P, Xiaomin W, Chongqing T et al. Cost–effectiveness analysis of adjuvant therapy for operable breast cancer from a Chinese perspective: doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide versus docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide. Pharmacoeconomics 27(10), 873–886 (2009).
25.
Wu B, Ma F. Cost–effectiveness of adding atezolizumab to first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 12, 1758835920916000 (2020).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Pages: 391 - 397
PubMed: 35179053
Copyright
© 2022 Future Medicine Ltd.
History
Received: 9 May 2021
Accepted: 5 January 2022
Published online: 18 February 2022
Keywords:
Topics
Authors
Funding Information
Fujian Provincial Health Commission: 2020QNA014
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Article usage data only available from February 2023. Historical article usage data, showing the number of article downloads, is available upon request.
Citations
How to Cite
Cost–effectiveness of pembrolizumab for second-line treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients with a combined positive score of 10 or more. (2022) Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. DOI: 10.2217/cer-2021-0112
Export citation
Select the citation format you wish to export for this article or chapter.
Citing Literature
- Pingyu Chen, Chang Fu, Lin Shen, Zhengyang Fei, Mengjie Luo, Yanqiu Chen, Hongchao Li, Cost-effectiveness analysis of tislelizumab vs. camrelizumab for the treatment of second-line locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, BMC Health Services Research, 10.1186/s12913-024-11142-5, 24, 1, (2024).
- Zhiwei Zheng, Jingrong Lin, Huide Zhu, Hongfu Cai, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy vs. Chemotherapy Alone as First-Line Treatment in Patients With Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma and PD-L1 CPS of 10 or More, Frontiers in Public Health, 10.3389/fpubh.2022.893387, 10, (2022).