← 返回

中国复发/难治性多发性骨髓瘤患者 CAR-T 细胞治疗的成本效果分析

英文原题:Cost effectiveness analysis of CAR-T cell therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in China.

查看英文原题

Cost effectiveness analysis of CAR-T cell therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in China.

PubMed 2023/01/01(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

基于 2021 年中国人均 GDP 3 倍的支付意愿,与挽救性化疗相比,Cilta-cel 被认为是中国 RRMM 更具成本效益的选择,而 Ide-cel 则不然。

研究思路结论见上方概要

由于CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞疗法的出现,复发/难治性多发性骨髓瘤(RRMM)的治疗策略格局已发生巨大变化。本研究旨在从中国医疗体系的角度评估两种CAR-T 细胞疗法用于RRMM患者的成本效果。

采用Markov模型比较目前可用的挽救性化疗与Idecabtagene vicleucel(Ide-cel)和Ciltacabtagene autoleucel(Cilta-cel)治疗RRMM患者的效果。该模型基于三项研究的数据开发:CARTITUDE-1、KarMMa和MAMMOTH。RRMM患者的医疗成本和效用来自中国一家省级临床中心。

在基础案例分析中,接受Ide-cel和Cilta-cel治疗的RRMM患者预计5年后长期生存的比例分别为3.4%和36.6%。与挽救性化疗相比,Ide-cel和Cilta-cel分别增加了1.19和3.31个QALYs,增量成本分别为140,693美元和119,806美元,导致ICER分别为每QALY 118,229美元和36,195美元。在ICER阈值为37,653美元/QALY时,Ide-cel和Cilta-cel具有成本效益的概率估计分别为0%和72%。当更年轻的目标人群进入模型,以及在情景分析中使用分区生存模型时,Cilta-cel和Ide-cel的ICER变化相当轻微,其成本效益结果与基础分析相同。

展开英文摘要原文

The landscape of treatment strategies for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has dramatically changed due to the emergence of chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two CAR-T cell treatments for RRMM patients from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

A Markov model was used to compare currently available salvage chemotherapy with Idecabtagene vicleucel (Ide-cel) and Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (Cilta-cel) for treatment of patients with RRMM. The model was developed based on data from three studies: CARTITUDE-1, KarMMa, and MAMMOTH. The healthcare cost and utility of RRMM patients were collected from a provincial clinical center in China.

In the base case analysis, 3.4% and 36.6% of RRMM patients were expected to be long-term survivors after 5 years of Ide-cel and Cilta-cel treatment, respectively. Compared to salvage chemotherapy, Ide-cel and Cilta-cel were associated with incremental QALYs of 1.19 and 3.31, and incremental costs of US$140,693 and $119,806, leading to ICERs of $118,229 and $36,195 per QALY, respectively. At an ICER threshold of $37,653/QALY gained, the probability that Ide-cel and Cilta-cel are cost-effective were estimated to be 0% and 72%, respectively. With younger target people entering the model, and a partitioned survival model in scenario analysis, the ICERs of Cilta-cel and Ide-cel changed rather mildly and their cost-effectiveness results were the same as base analysis.

Based on the willingness-to-pay of 3-times China's per capita GDP in 2021, Cilta-cel was considered to be a more cost-effective option compared to salvage chemotherapy for RRMM in China, while Ide-cel was not.

论文信息

作者
Wu W、Ding S、Mingming Z、Yuping Z、Sun X、Zhao Z、Yang Y、Hu Y
单位
Center for Health Policy Studies, School of Public Health, and Department of Science and Education of the Fourth Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.China
期刊
Journal of medical economics2023 Jan-Dec
原文标识
PubMed 37145966 · DOI 10.1080/13696998.2023.2207742