Author
Listed:
- Leila-Sophie Otten
(Radboud University Medical Center)
- Alessandra I. G. Buma
(Radboud University Medical Center)
- Berber Piet
(Radboud University Medical Center)
- Rob Heine
(Radboud University Medical Center)
- Michel M. Heuvel
(Radboud University Medical Center)
- Valesca P. Retèl
(The Netherlands Cancer Institute
University of Twente)
Abstract
Objectives Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-containing treatment is currently prescribed as first-line treatment for all patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without targetable driver mutations. However, only 30–45% of patients show no progression within 12 months after treatment start. Various biomarkers are being studied to save costly and potentially harmful treatment in non-responders. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of implementing a hypothetical predictive biomarker for ICI-containing treatment response compared with standard of care (e.g., no implemented biomarker) for pembrolizumab-containing treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC in the Netherlands. Materials and Methods Standard-of-care-based and predictive-biomarker-based strategies were compared using Markov models for three first-line pembrolizumab-containing treatments depending on a patient’s tumor programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression and histology. A Dutch healthcare system perspective was adopted. Assuming a receiver operating characteristic-area under the curve of 1.0 in identifying responders, alternative treatments were offered for non-responders in the predictive-biomarker-based strategy. Parameters and assumptions were based on real-world data from surveys, literature using a targeted search, expert opinion, and registries. Outcomes included differences in costs, survival (life years (LYs)), and survival corrected for health-related quality of life (QoL) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) between the predictive-biomarker- and standard-of-care-based strategy. Results Implementing a predictive biomarker in pembrolizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel treatment led to a mean survival reduction of 24 days (− 0.067 LYs) (18 days corrected for QoL (− 0.049 QALYs)), with cost savings of €22,606 compared with standard of care. Pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab-pemetrexed-platinum treatments showed survival reductions of 4.5 and 3.9 months, respectively (3.6 and 2.8 months corrected for QoL), with cost savings of €24,345 and €28,456. Sensitivity analyses confirmed consistent cost savings and survival reductions. Survival losses were mainly observed due to the lower survival rates associated with the alternative first-line treatment options available for non-responders in the predictive-biomarker-based strategy within each pembrolizumab-containing treatment regimen. Pembrolizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel treatment also showed survival gains under certain conditions related to QoL and survival estimates. Conclusions Our study highlights the importance of careful de-implementation of ICI-treatments in advanced NSCLC, balancing costs reductions and side effects without comprising survival. In the pembrolizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel treatment regimen, the survival loss could be considered negligible. Future research should define acceptable tradeoffs and thresholds for de-implementation, considering factors such as survival of alternative treatments and responder classification to guide predictive biomarker implementation and optimize health resource allocation.
Suggested Citation
Leila-Sophie Otten & Alessandra I. G. Buma & Berber Piet & Rob Heine & Michel M. Heuvel & Valesca P. Retèl, 2025.
"Very Early Health Technology Assessment for Potential Predictive Biomarkers in the Treatment of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer,"
PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 471-485, May.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:9:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s41669-025-00557-3
DOI: 10.1007/s41669-025-00557-3
Download full text from publisher
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:pharmo:v:9:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s41669-025-00557-3. 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.