IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/hecrev/v12y2022i1d10.1186_s13561-022-00410-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness analysis of sintilimab plus pemetrexed and platinum versus chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment in metastatic non-squamous non–small cell lung cancer in China

Author

Listed:
  • Huiqin Liu

    (Cancer Prevention and Treatment Institute of Chengdu, Chengdu Fifth People’s Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Affiliated Fifth People’s Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine))

  • Ying Wang

    (Cancer Prevention and Treatment Institute of Chengdu, Chengdu Fifth People’s Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Affiliated Fifth People’s Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine))

  • Qi He

    (Cancer Prevention and Treatment Institute of Chengdu, Chengdu Fifth People’s Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Affiliated Fifth People’s Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine))

Abstract

Objective In frst-line treatment of advanced or metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the ORIENT-11 study demonstrated a signifcant progression-free survival and overall survival for sintilimab plus chemotherapy in comparison with chemotherapy alone. But the cost-effectiveness of the two treatment schemes is unclear in China. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the cost efectiveness of sintilimab plus chemotherapy versus Platinum-based chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC in China. Methods We performed an economic evaluation from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system using a partitioned survival model with three mutually exclusive health states: progression free, post-progression, and death. The circulation cycle of the model was 3 weeks and the study time limit was 10 years. Efficacy data were obtained from the ORIENT-11 clinical trial. Cost and utility values were derived from published studies and online price databases. The primary outcomes of the model were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). One-way sensitivity analysis and probability sensitivity analysis were used to verify the robustness of the base-case analysis results. Results Sintilimab plus chemotherapy provided an additional 0.6 QALYs. The total cost per patient was CNY¥413,273.16 for sintilimab plus chemotherapy and CNY¥280,695.23 for Platinum-based chemotherapy. The ICER for sintilimab plus chemotherapy was CNY¥220,963.22/QALY. Sensitivity analyses found the results to be most sensitive to the cost of pemetrexed and utilities of PF state. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, sintilimab was cost-efective in 78.6% of the simulations, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of CNY¥242,928 per QALY. Conclusion Compared with chemotherapy alone, the sintilimab plus chemotherapy is likely to be a cost-effective option as the first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Huiqin Liu & Ying Wang & Qi He, 2022. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of sintilimab plus pemetrexed and platinum versus chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment in metastatic non-squamous non–small cell lung cancer in China," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:12:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-022-00410-x
    DOI: 10.1186/s13561-022-00410-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s13561-022-00410-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s13561-022-00410-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:12:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-022-00410-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/13561 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.