IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v38y2020i4d10.1007_s40273-019-00870-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Durvalumab for the Treatment of Locally Advanced, Unresectable, Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Willem J. A. Witlox

    (Maastricht University Medical Centre+ (MUMC+))

  • Antoinette D. I. Asselt

    (Maastricht University Medical Centre+ (MUMC+)
    University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen)

  • Robert Wolff

    (Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd)

  • Nigel Armstrong

    (Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd)

  • Gill Worthy

    (Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd)

  • Annette Chalker

    (Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd)

  • Titas Buksnys

    (Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd)

  • Lisa Stirk

    (Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd)

  • Jos Kleijnen

    (Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd
    Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University)

  • Manuela A. Joore

    (Maastricht University Medical Centre+ (MUMC+)
    Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University)

  • Sabine E. Grimm

    (Maastricht University Medical Centre+ (MUMC+))

Abstract

As part of the Single Technology Appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer (AstraZeneca) of durvalumab (IMFINZITM) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of durvalumab for the treatment of patients with locally advanced, unresectable, stage III non-small cell lung cancer whose tumours express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) on ≥ 1% of tumour cells and whose disease has not progressed after platinum-based chemoradiation therapy. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, in collaboration with Maastricht University Medical Centre, was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). This paper summarises the company submission (CS), presents the ERG’s critical review on the clinical- and cost-effectiveness evidence in the CS, highlights the key methodological considerations, and describes the development of the NICE guidance by the Appraisal Committee. The CS included a systematic review that identified one randomised controlled trial, comparing durvalumab with SoC. Participants with tumours expressing PD-L1 on ≥ 1% of tumour cells accounted for approximately 40% of the total participants. In this subgroup, a benefit in progression-free survival (PFS) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31–0.63] and overall survival (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.35–0.81) was reported. Adverse events were comparable between both treatments, but more serious adverse events were reported for durvalumab (64/213 [30%] vs. 18/90 [20%]). The ERG’s concerns regarding the economic analysis included a likely overestimation of PFS for the durvalumab arm, the choice of timepoint for treatment waning, as well as the way treatment waning was incorporated in the model, and potential overestimation of utility values without applying an age- or treatment-related decrement. The revised ERG base-case resulted in a deterministic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £50,238 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, with substantial remaining uncertainty. NICE recommended durvalumab as an option for use within the Cancer Drugs Fund only in a subpopulation (concurrent platinum-based chemoradiation therapy) with a commercially managed access agreement in place.

Suggested Citation

  • Willem J. A. Witlox & Antoinette D. I. Asselt & Robert Wolff & Nigel Armstrong & Gill Worthy & Annette Chalker & Titas Buksnys & Lisa Stirk & Jos Kleijnen & Manuela A. Joore & Sabine E. Grimm, 2020. "Durvalumab for the Treatment of Locally Advanced, Unresectable, Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 317-324, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s40273-019-00870-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-019-00870-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-019-00870-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-019-00870-w?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s40273-019-00870-w. 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 .

    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.