Treatment Patterns and Healthcare Resource Use (HRU) in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma (mMEL) Treated With BRAF-MEK Inhibitor Targeted Therapies (TTs)
Author(s)
Gino K. In, MD, MPH1, Kristina Chen, MS, PharmD2, Gautam Sajeev, ScD3, Mu Cheng, MPH3, Jingyi Chen, MS3, Joanne Chukwueke, MPH3, Jessie J. Lan, MS3, James Signorovitch, PhD3;
1Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, USC Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA, 3Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, MA, USA
1Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, USC Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA, 3Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, MA, USA
OBJECTIVES: To describe treatment patterns and HRU in patients with mMEL receiving encorafenib+binimetinib (E+B) or dabrafenib+trametinib (D+T).
METHODS: Patients from the IQVIA Pharmetrics® Plus claims database initiating first-line (1L) or second-line (2L) treatment with E+B or D+T (06/2018-03/2023) were included. Treatment patterns and HRU were compared between TTs, adjusting for baseline differences.
RESULTS: At baseline in 1L, E+B patients (n=117) were younger than D+T patients (n=137; mean age: 51 vs 55 years) and more likely to have lymph node (63% vs 50%) or bone metastases (28% vs 18%). In 2L, E+B patients (n=60) had higher rates of brain metastases (53% vs 43%), and more melanoma-specific emergency room and outpatient (OP) visits than D+T patients (n=56).Similar proportions of 1L E+B and D+T patients received prior radiation (11% vs 9%) and subsequent immunotherapy (IO; 26% vs 27%) or TTs (17% vs 19%). Among patients on TTs in 2L, E+B patients were more likely to have received TT as 1L (20% vs. 7%), and less likely to have received IO as 1L (73% vs 86%) than D+T patients. Treatment discontinuation was significantly lower for E+B in 1L (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.70 [0.51, 0.95]) and numerically lower in 2L (0.74 [0.44, 1.24]). In 1L, E+B patients had significantly lower inpatient (IP) admissions (adjusted rate ratio [RR]: 0.46 [0.31, 0.70] for all-cause; 0.45 [0.29, 0.70] for melanoma-specific) and lower OP visits (RR: 0.87 [0.83, 0.92] for all-cause; 0.83 [0.77, 0.89] for melanoma-specific). In 2L, E+B had numerically lower IP admissions but higher OP visits (RR: 1.26 [1.18, 1.36] for all-cause; 1.33 [1.21, 1.46] for melanoma-specific).
CONCLUSIONS: E+B was associated with lower treatment discontinuation and lower IP admission rates in both 1L and 2L, but higher OP visit rates in 2L Future research should explore reasons for these differences to understand their clinical and economic implications.
METHODS: Patients from the IQVIA Pharmetrics® Plus claims database initiating first-line (1L) or second-line (2L) treatment with E+B or D+T (06/2018-03/2023) were included. Treatment patterns and HRU were compared between TTs, adjusting for baseline differences.
RESULTS: At baseline in 1L, E+B patients (n=117) were younger than D+T patients (n=137; mean age: 51 vs 55 years) and more likely to have lymph node (63% vs 50%) or bone metastases (28% vs 18%). In 2L, E+B patients (n=60) had higher rates of brain metastases (53% vs 43%), and more melanoma-specific emergency room and outpatient (OP) visits than D+T patients (n=56).Similar proportions of 1L E+B and D+T patients received prior radiation (11% vs 9%) and subsequent immunotherapy (IO; 26% vs 27%) or TTs (17% vs 19%). Among patients on TTs in 2L, E+B patients were more likely to have received TT as 1L (20% vs. 7%), and less likely to have received IO as 1L (73% vs 86%) than D+T patients. Treatment discontinuation was significantly lower for E+B in 1L (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.70 [0.51, 0.95]) and numerically lower in 2L (0.74 [0.44, 1.24]). In 1L, E+B patients had significantly lower inpatient (IP) admissions (adjusted rate ratio [RR]: 0.46 [0.31, 0.70] for all-cause; 0.45 [0.29, 0.70] for melanoma-specific) and lower OP visits (RR: 0.87 [0.83, 0.92] for all-cause; 0.83 [0.77, 0.89] for melanoma-specific). In 2L, E+B had numerically lower IP admissions but higher OP visits (RR: 1.26 [1.18, 1.36] for all-cause; 1.33 [1.21, 1.46] for melanoma-specific).
CONCLUSIONS: E+B was associated with lower treatment discontinuation and lower IP admission rates in both 1L and 2L, but higher OP visit rates in 2L Future research should explore reasons for these differences to understand their clinical and economic implications.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-05, ISPOR 2025, Montréal, Quebec, CA
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S1
Code
EE162
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies
Disease
SDC: Oncology