CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞疗法在非肿瘤性疾病中的应用
Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy in non-oncological diseases.
CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞在血液系统恶性肿瘤中的应用推动了这种免疫治疗形式的显著进展。
CELL INTELLIGENCE · 肿瘤细胞治疗研究
肿瘤细胞治疗研究
英文原题:Second-Line Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Second-Line Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
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。
在每 QALY 200 000 美元的支付意愿阈值下,二线 axi-cel 与 liso-cel 均不具有成本效益。
弥漫大B细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)一线治疗可使约60%的患者获得持久缓解。复发/难治性疾病中,挽救性化学免疫治疗联合巩固性自体干细胞移植(ASCT)仅使约20%的患者获得持久缓解。ZUMA-7(axicabtagene ciloleucel〔axi-cel〕)和TRANSFORM(lisocabtagene maraleucel〔liso-cel〕)试验显示,对于原发难治或早期复发(高风险)DLBCL,CAR-T 细胞治疗较挽救性化学免疫治疗联合巩固性ASCT可改善无事件生存期(ZUMA-7中还改善了总生存期);但CAR-T 每次输注的标价超过40万美元。
评估二线CAR-T 与挽救性化学免疫治疗联合巩固性ASCT相比的成本效益。 设计:状态转移微观模拟模型。 数据来源:ZUMA-7、TRANSFORM、其他试验及观察性数据。 目标人群:“高风险”DLBCL患者。 时间范围:终生。 研究视角:医疗卫生部门。 干预措施:axi-cel或liso-cel与ASCT比较。 结局指标:在每质量调整生命年(QALY)愿付阈值(WTP)为200,000美元时,以2022年美元/QALY计的增量成本效益比(ICER)和增量净货币效益(iNMB)。 基线分析结果:axi-cel和liso-cel的总生存期中位数分别增加4个月和1个月。axi-cel的ICER为每QALY 684,225美元,iNMB为-107,642美元;liso-cel的ICER为每QALY 1,171,909美元,iNMB为-102,477美元。 敏感性分析结果:若要在WTP为每QALY 200,000美元时具有成本效益,CAR-T 成本须降至axi-cel 321,123美元、liso-cel 313,730美元。对高风险患者实施该治疗将在5年内使美国医疗支出增加约68亿美元。 局限性:输注前桥接治疗的差异妨碍了试验间比较。
在每QALY 200,000美元的WTP阈值下,二线axi-cel和liso-cel均不具成本效益。临床结局有所改善,但需大幅降低CAR-T 成本才能实现成本效益。 主要经费来源:无专项研究经费。
First-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) achieves durable remission in approximately 60% of patients. In relapsed or refractory disease, only about 20% achieve durable remission with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The ZUMA-7 (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel]) and TRANSFORM (lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel]) trials demonstrated superior event-free survival (and, in ZUMA-7, overall survival) in primary-refractory or early-relapsed (high-risk) DLBCL with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) compared with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT; however, list prices for CAR-T exceed $400 000 per infusion.
To determine the cost-effectiveness of second-line CAR-T versus salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT. DESIGN: State-transition microsimulation model. DATA SOURCES: ZUMA-7, TRANSFORM, other trials, and observational data. TARGET POPULATION: "High-risk" patients with DLBCL. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care sector. INTERVENTION: Axi-cel or liso-cel versus ASCT. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) in 2022 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $200 000 per QALY. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: The increase in median overall survival was 4 months for axi-cel and 1 month for liso-cel. For axi-cel, the ICER was $684 225 per QALY and the iNMB was -$107 642. For liso-cel, the ICER was $1 171 909 per QALY and the iNMB was -$102 477. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: To be cost-effective with a WTP of $200 000, the cost of CAR-T would have to be reduced to $321 123 for axi-cel and $313 730 for liso-cel. Implementation in high-risk patients would increase U.S. health care spending by approximately $6.8 billion over a 5-year period. LIMITATION: Differences in preinfusion bridging therapies precluded cross-trial comparisons.
Neither second-line axi-cel nor liso-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $200 000 per QALY. Clinical outcomes improved incrementally, but costs of CAR-T must be lowered substantially to enable cost-effectiveness. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: No research-specific funding.
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。