Clinical Value of Testing for c-Met Protein Overexpression in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Author(s)
Samuel Crawford, PhD1, Kellie Woll, PhD1, Pamela Martin, PhD2, Timothy Klein, BS2, Pallavi Mhaske, MD1, Andrea Wagner, PharmD, BSc1.
1AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, USA, 2Medical Decision Modeling Inc, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
1AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, USA, 2Medical Decision Modeling Inc, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the clinical value of testing patients with advanced/metastatic EGFR wild-type non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with MET immunohistochemistry (IHC) to identify those with high and high/intermediate c-Met protein overexpression (OE), who would then be eligible for telisotuzumab vedotin (Teliso-V), an investigational antibody-drug conjugate.
METHODS: A deterministic decision-tree (for treatment and MET IHC testing allocations) into a stochastic partition-survival model (for efficacy-related outcomes) was used to evaluate clinical utility of MET IHC testing. The model simulated patients into two cohorts: tested or not-tested. Patients with no testing received standard of care (SOC). Patients with testing and c-Met protein OE positivity received Teliso-V, while patients with c-Met low/no OE received SOC. Two scenarios, c-Met OE or c-Met high OE, were analyzed. Prevalence and clinical outcomes among patients with c-MET protein OE treated with SOC or Teliso-V were based on published literature. Efficacy inputs (ie, overall survival, progression-free survival) were estimated based on exponential survival curves derived from published clinical and real-world data. The model estimated expected and incremental life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
RESULTS: For patients tested for c-Met protein OE, simulated patients in the tested cohort had an incremental improvement of 6154 LYs and 4363 QALYs relative to patients in the not-tested cohort, among all eligible patients in the US. Among those patients who would have tested positive for c-Met protein OE in both tested and not-tested cohorts, those in the tested cohorts had a 79.0% and 79.2% incremental improvement in LYs and QALYs, respectively. c-Met high OE analyses also demonstrated LY and QALY improvements among those tested for c-Met.
CONCLUSIONS: The model findings suggest clinical value in implementing testing for c-Met protein OE among all eligible NSCLC patients, as demonstrated by improved outcomes among patients when MET IHC testing is conducted.
METHODS: A deterministic decision-tree (for treatment and MET IHC testing allocations) into a stochastic partition-survival model (for efficacy-related outcomes) was used to evaluate clinical utility of MET IHC testing. The model simulated patients into two cohorts: tested or not-tested. Patients with no testing received standard of care (SOC). Patients with testing and c-Met protein OE positivity received Teliso-V, while patients with c-Met low/no OE received SOC. Two scenarios, c-Met OE or c-Met high OE, were analyzed. Prevalence and clinical outcomes among patients with c-MET protein OE treated with SOC or Teliso-V were based on published literature. Efficacy inputs (ie, overall survival, progression-free survival) were estimated based on exponential survival curves derived from published clinical and real-world data. The model estimated expected and incremental life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
RESULTS: For patients tested for c-Met protein OE, simulated patients in the tested cohort had an incremental improvement of 6154 LYs and 4363 QALYs relative to patients in the not-tested cohort, among all eligible patients in the US. Among those patients who would have tested positive for c-Met protein OE in both tested and not-tested cohorts, those in the tested cohorts had a 79.0% and 79.2% incremental improvement in LYs and QALYs, respectively. c-Met high OE analyses also demonstrated LY and QALY improvements among those tested for c-Met.
CONCLUSIONS: The model findings suggest clinical value in implementing testing for c-Met protein OE among all eligible NSCLC patients, as demonstrated by improved outcomes among patients when MET IHC testing is conducted.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-05, ISPOR 2025, Montréal, Quebec, CA
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S1
Code
EE197
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Disease
SDC: Oncology