IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v5y2021i2d10.1007_s41669-020-00245-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Effectiveness of Nivolumab in Patients with Advanced, Previously Treated Squamous and Non-squamous Non-small-cell Lung Cancer in England

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Rothwell

    (RTI Health Solutions)

  • Christopher Kiff

    (Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Ltd)

  • Caroline Ling

    (RTI Health Solutions)

  • Thor-Henrik Brodtkorb

    (RTI Health Solutions)

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the cost effectiveness of nivolumab versus docetaxel in previously treated, advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in England and assess how conditional reimbursement within the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) can be used to ensure timely patient access to effective treatments. Methods Cost-effectiveness models developed for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) TA483 (squamous) and TA484 (non-squamous) technology appraisals were supplemented with updated overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time-to-treatment discontinuation data collected as part of the CDF data collection agreement. Both models were developed by using a partitioned-survival approach based on PFS and OS predictions from CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057 to estimate the projected proportion of patients in each health state (progression free, progression, death) throughout the model’s time horizon. The primary outcomes were estimated costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as cost/QALY gained. Results Base-case ICERs for treating patients with nivolumab versus docetaxel were £35,657/QALY and £38,703/QALY for squamous and non-squamous NSCLC patients, respectively, which are substantially lower than those obtained from what were deemed to be the most appropriate analyses for decision making in the original submissions when run with the same patient access scheme discount: £68,576/QALY and £73,189/QALY gained for squamous and non-squamous NSCLC, respectively. Conclusions Nivolumab versus docetaxel is cost effective for treating locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC after prior chemotherapy in adults, regardless of tumour histology or programmed death-ligand 1 expression status.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Rothwell & Christopher Kiff & Caroline Ling & Thor-Henrik Brodtkorb, 2021. "Cost Effectiveness of Nivolumab in Patients with Advanced, Previously Treated Squamous and Non-squamous Non-small-cell Lung Cancer in England," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 251-260, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:5:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s41669-020-00245-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-020-00245-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-020-00245-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-020-00245-4?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. M. A. Chaudhary & M. Edmondson-Jones & G. Baio & E. Mackay & J. R. Penrod & D. J. Sharpe & G. Yates & S. Rafiq & K. Johannesen & M. K. Siddiqui & J. Vanderpuye-Orgle & A. Briggs, 2023. "Use of Advanced Flexible Modeling Approaches for Survival Extrapolation from Early Follow-up Data in two Nivolumab Trials in Advanced NSCLC with Extended Follow-up," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(1), pages 91-109, January.

    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:pharmo:v:5:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s41669-020-00245-4. 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.