COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF CERITINIB IN PREVIOUSLY UNTREATED ALK-POSITIVE NON-SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

Author(s)

Xie J1, Knoll S2, Slowley A3, Bensimon A4, Vieira J3, Chilcott J5, Paisley S5, Zhou Z6
1Analysis Group, Inc., New York, NY, USA, 2Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA, 3Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Limited, Camberley, Surrey, UK, 4Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, MA, USA, 5University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK, 6Analysis Group, Inc., London, UK

OBJECTIVES To assess the cost-effectiveness of ceritinib versus crizotinib in the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the UK National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Service (PSS) perspective.

METHODS A partitioned survival model with three health states (stable/progressive/death) was built to evaluate costs and effectiveness associated with first-line treatment with ceritinib compared to crizotinib over a 20-year time horizon. Efficacy inputs (progression-free and overall survival) of ceritinib were estimated using data from a phase III randomized trial (ASCEND-4) and were extrapolated beyond the trial period using parametric survival models. Relative efficacy of ceritinib vs. crizotinib was estimated using matching-adjusted indirect comparison based on ASCEND-4 trial data and published PROFILE 1014 results. Drug acquisition, administration, adverse event, and medical costs associated with each health state were obtained from publicly available databases or literature. Treatment-specific utilities for the pre-progression state were based on EQ-5D results from each trial. Utility for the progressive state was obtained from literature. Incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and life years (LY) gained were estimated comparing ceritinib vs. crizotinib. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS Over a 20-year time horizon, total QALYs was estimated to be 3.22 for first-line treatment with ceritinib and 2.68 for first-line treatment with crizotinib. Total LYs were estimated to be 4.51 and 3.85, respectively. Total costs over the 20-year time horizon were £106,954 for ceritinib and £91,970 for crizotinib. Thus, the incremental cost per QALY gained over a 20-year time horizon was estimated to be £27,936 for ceritinib vs. crizotinib, and the corresponding incremental cost per LY gained was estimated to be £22,599. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS Compared with crizotinib, ceritinib offers a cost-effective option in the treatment of previously untreated ALK+ advanced NCSLC.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2018-05, ISPOR 2018, Baltimore, MD, USA

Value in Health, Vol. 21, S1 (May 2018)

Code

PCN105

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis

Disease

Oncology

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


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

×