Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cemiplimab for Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma in Spain

Author(s)

Sánchez-Martín J1, León L2, Sánchez-Hernández A3, Uria E4, Nieves D4
1Pharmalex, Barcelona, B, Spain, 2Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 3Consorcio Hospitalario Provincial de Castellón, Castellón de la Plana, Spain, 4Pharmalex, Barcelona, Spain

Presentation Documents

OBJECTIVES: EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial demonstrated that cemiplimab as monotherapy significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) with PD-L1 of at least 50%, providing a potential new treatment option for this patient population. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab versus pembrolizumab in the first line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC expressing PD-L1 in ≥50% of tumor cells in Spain.

METHODS: A partitioned survival model was adapted considering the Spanish National Healthcare System perspective, over a lifetime horizon. OS and PFS were estimated from the studies EMPOWER-Lung 1 (cemiplimab) and KEYNOTE-024 (pembrolizumab). Time-varying hazard ratios from a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials were considered for survival outcomes. Direct health care costs (euros 2021) obtained from national databases and literature were considered. Utilities were derived from the EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial and disutility were derived from literature. A 3% annual discount rate was applied to effects and costs. Results were expressed in life years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained, costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity analyses were performed to explore uncertainties.

RESULTS: After the patient's lifetime, the cost differential was €-6,301 compared to pembrolizumab (€61,893 vs €68,194). In terms of health outcomes, treatment with cemiplimab provided 0.93 LYG versus pembrolizumab (3.70 vs 2.77). Therefore, the ICER of cemiplimab was dominant versus pembrolizumab. Expressing health outcomes in QALYs, cemiplimab was associated with a gain of 0.64 QALYs vs. pembrolizumab (2.65 vs. 2.01). The resulting cost-utility ratio was also dominant over pembrolizumab. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the model.

CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that cemiplimab versus pembrolizumab is a cost-effective first-line treatment option for advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 expression ≥50% in Spain.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2022-11, ISPOR Europe 2022, Vienna, Austria

Value in Health, Volume 25, Issue 12S (December 2022)

Code

EE327

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis

Disease

No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×