IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v40y2022i12d10.1007_s40273-022-01196-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Effectiveness of Adding Pembrolizumab to Platinum and Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Esophageal Cancer: A US Healthcare Payer’s Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Tingting Qu

    (Health Economics and Analysis)

  • Shujing Zhang

    (Merck & Co., Inc.)

  • Yichen Zhong

    (Merck & Co., Inc.)

  • Yang Meng

    (Health Economics and Analysis)

  • He Guo

    (Merck & Co., Inc.)

  • Seongjung Joo

    (Merck & Co., Inc.)

  • Peter C. Enzinger

    (Harvard University)

Abstract

Background and Objective Pembrolizumab plus cisplatin and fluorouracil demonstrated superior efficacy and comparable safety compared with fluorouracil and cisplatin (FP) as first-line treatment for locally advanced unresectable or metastatic carcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in a phase III trial (KEYNOTE-590). This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab plus FP versus FP and versus a blended chemotherapy comparator including FP, carboplatin plus paclitaxel, FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, docetaxel plus FP, trastuzumab plus FP, and trastuzumab plus FOLFOX from a US healthcare payer’s perspective. Methods A partitioned survival model was developed with three health states (progression-free, progressive disease, and death). Overall survival, progression-free survival, time on treatment, and adverse events were informed by patient-level data from KEYNOTE-590. The blended chemotherapy comparator reflected the current US treatment landscape and was assumed to have similar efficacy and safety as FP. Health utilities were estimated using linear mixed-effects models based on EQ-5D-5L data from the trial. Resource use and cost inputs (2020 US dollars) were based on US standard sources and literature. Costs, life-years, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) discounted at 3.0% per year and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were outcomes in the model. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of base-case results. Results Compared with FP, pembrolizumab plus FP produced a mean gain of 0.86 life-year and 0.77 QALY with additional costs of $112,630 over 37.6 years, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $147,097 per QALY. Results were similar when the intervention was pembrolizumab plus alternative chemotherapies or when blended chemotherapy became the comparator. Results were most sensitive to different overall survival extrapolation approaches. Conclusions Our analysis suggests that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy extended life-years and QALYs and is cost effective compared with chemotherapy alone as a first-line treatment for advanced esophageal cancer in the USA given a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY.

Suggested Citation

  • Tingting Qu & Shujing Zhang & Yichen Zhong & Yang Meng & He Guo & Seongjung Joo & Peter C. Enzinger, 2022. "Cost Effectiveness of Adding Pembrolizumab to Platinum and Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Esophageal Cancer: A US Healthcare Payer’s Perspective," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(12), pages 1247-1259, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:40:y:2022:i:12:d:10.1007_s40273-022-01196-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01196-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-022-01196-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/s40273-022-01196-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:40:y:2022:i:12:d:10.1007_s40273-022-01196-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.