← 返回

美国两线或以上系统治疗后复发/难治性大 B 细胞淋巴瘤成人患者中 axicabtagene ciloleucel 对比 lisocabtagene maraleucel 的成本效果

英文原题:Cost-effectiveness of axicabtagene ciloleucel versus lisocabtagene maraleucel for adult patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma after two or more lines of systemic therapy in the US.

查看英文原题

Cost-effectiveness of axicabtagene ciloleucel versus lisocabtagene maraleucel for adult patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma after two or more lines of systemic therapy in the US.

PubMed 2022/01/01(内容时间) J Med Econ Q1 · IF 3.1(JCR 2025)

分数与星级只用于站内排序 —— 不代表疗效、安全性或个人适用性。

研究概要

在美国,对于接受过两线或以上全身治疗的复发/难治性 LBCL 成人患者,axi-cel 相比 liso-cel 是一种可能具有成本效益的治疗选择。

中文摘要

从美国支付方角度,评估两种CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞疗法——阿基仑赛(axi-cel)与利基仑赛(liso-cel)——用于既往接受两线及以上全身治疗后复发/难治性(r/r)大B细胞淋巴瘤(LBCL)成人患者的成本效果。

建立包含三个健康状态(疾病进展前、进展后、死亡)的分区生存模型,估算患者终生结局。采用混合治愈模型外推生存,以考虑长期缓解。生存参数基于匹配调整间接比较(MAIC):对接受axi-cel的ZUMA-1人群进行重新加权,使其与评估liso-cel的TRANSCEND-NHL-001患者特征相匹配。成本依据已发表文献和数据库,涵盖单采、药物获取及预处理化疗和CAR-T 治疗的给药、监测、移植、住院、不良事件、常规照护和临终照护。效用值来自ZUMA-1和相关文献。研究开展了确定性及概率敏感性分析。

基础分析中,与liso-cel相比,axi-cel带来更多质量调整生命年(QALY)(7.76比5.94),总成本也更高(611,440美元比597,174美元),每增加一个QALY的成本为7,843美元。增量成本(14,266美元)主要由常规照护成本增加(18,596美元,因生存时间更长)和住院成本增加(10,993美元)驱动,部分被CAR-T 治疗获取成本(减少11,300美元)和临终照护成本(减少4,025美元)的降低抵消。敏感性分析一致支持基础分析结果的稳健性。 局限性:本研究依赖MAIC,无法考虑试验设计差异和未观察到的混杂因素。对于近期获批的CAR-T 疗法,仍需真实世界研究验证本研究结果。由于数据缺乏,研究依据临床医生意见,假设两种疗法的移植使用情况及B细胞再生障碍治疗情况相同。

在美国,对于既往接受两线及以上全身治疗的r/r LBCL成人患者,与liso-cel相比,axi-cel可能是一种具有成本效果的治疗选择。

展开英文摘要原文

We developed a 3-state (i.e., pre-progression, post-progression, death) partitioned survival model to estimate patients' lifetime outcomes. Mixture cure models were used for survival extrapolation to account for long-term remission. Survival inputs were based on a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) that reweighted the ZUMA-1 population (receiving axi-cel) to match patient characteristics in TRANSCEND-NHL-001 (assessing liso-cel). Costs included apheresis, drug acquisition, and administration for conditioning chemotherapy and CAR T therapies, monitoring, transplant, hospitalization, adverse events, routine care, and terminal care, per published literature and databases. Utilities were derived from ZUMA-1 and literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

In the base case, axi-cel was associated with more QALYs (7.76 vs. 5.94) and greater costs overall ($611,440 vs. $597,174) than liso-cel, at $7,843/QALY gained. The incremental costs (+$14,266) were largely driven by higher routine care costs (+$18,596) due to longer survival and hospitalization (+$10,993) but partially offset by reduced costs of CAR T acquisition ( $11,300) and terminal care ( $4,025). Sensitivity analyses consistently suggested robustness of base-case results. LIMITATIONS: This study relied on an MAIC in which trial design differences and unobserved confounders could not be accounted for. Future real-world studies for recently approved CAR T are warranted to validate our results. Due to a lack of data, we assumed equivalent use of transplants and treatment for B-cell aplasia between the two therapies based on clinicians' opinions.

In the US, axi-cel is a potentially cost-effective treatment option compared with liso-cel for adult patients with r/r LBCL after two or more systemic therapy lines.

论文信息

作者
Oluwole OO、Liu R、Diakite I、Feng C、Patel A、Nourhussein I、Snider JT、Locke FL
第一作者单位
Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, USA.United States
通讯作者单位
Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.United States
期刊
Journal of medical economics2022 Jan-Dec
原文标识
PubMed 35443867 · DOI 10.1080/13696998.2022.2065787