Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus pembrolizumab and axitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma with intermediate or poor prognostic risk: a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective

OBJECTIVENivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) and pembrolizumab plus axitinib (PEM + AXI) have demonstrated significant clinical benefits as first-line (1 L) treatments for intermediate/poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) patients. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of NI...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of medical economics 2023-12, Vol.26 (1), p.1108-1121
Hauptverfasser: Dhanji, Nishit, Decimoni, Tassia Cristina, Dyer, Matthew T. D., May, Jessica R., van de Wetering, Gijs, Petersohn, Svenja, Nickel, Katharina, Silva, Amanda, Muniz, David Q. B., Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1121
container_issue 1
container_start_page 1108
container_title Journal of medical economics
container_volume 26
creator Dhanji, Nishit
Decimoni, Tassia Cristina
Dyer, Matthew T. D.
May, Jessica R.
van de Wetering, Gijs
Petersohn, Svenja
Nickel, Katharina
Silva, Amanda
Muniz, David Q. B.
Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula
description OBJECTIVENivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) and pembrolizumab plus axitinib (PEM + AXI) have demonstrated significant clinical benefits as first-line (1 L) treatments for intermediate/poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) patients. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of NIVO + IPI versus PEM + AXI from a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective, utilizing a novel approach to estimate comparative efficacy between the treatments.METHODSA three-state partitioned survival model (progression-free, progressed, and death) was developed to estimate costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) over a 40-year time horizon. In the absence of head-to-head comparisons between NIVO + IPI and PEM + AXI, clinical data for NIVO + IPI was obtained from CheckMate 214 (NCT02231749) and for PEM + AXI from KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331). A matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted to account for the imbalance of treatment effect modifiers between the trials. Patient characteristics, resource use, health state utilities, and costs were based on Brazilian-specific sources. Costs and health outcomes were both discounted by 5% annually in line with Brazilian guidelines. The robustness of the results was evaluated through extensive sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses.RESULTSWhen comparing the matched versus unmatched OS, PFS, and TTD curves there was no noteworthy difference. NIVO + IPI was associated with cost savings (R$ 350,232), higher LYs (5.54 vs. 4.61), and QALYs (4.74 vs. 3.76) versus PEM + AXI, resulting in NIVO + IPI dominating PEM + AXI. Key model drivers were the treatment duration for PEM, NIVO, and AXI. NIVO + IPI remained dominant in all scenario analyses, which indicated that model results were robust to alternative modelling inputs or assumptions.CONCLUSIONSThis analysis shows that NIVO + IPI is estimated to be a life-extending and potentially cost-saving 1 L treatment option when compared with PEM + AXI for intermediate/poor-risk a RCC patients in the Brazilian private healthcare system.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/13696998.2023.2252716
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2857853796</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2857853796</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-f3aba3570687d3f7c49b5c20ab149c8bd6260eba90a424d9ad8c403657ecd1123</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kc9u1DAQxiMEElXbR0DysZcs_pPENjdY0YJUqZdW4hZN7AlrmtiL7Q1tH5JnwmHbzmHGln_6_I2-qvrA6IZRRT8y0elOa7XhlIsN5y2XrHtTnTDdsFoJ-eNtORemXqH31XlKv2gpIRiV7KT6uw0p1ziOaLJb0GNKJIzEuyVMhxkGAt4St3eTm_9fF4zpkMge5yGGyT29MvDgsvNuIM4TsAt4g5ZE9DARg1NpEI3zYQbyx-VdoTLGGa2DjCREsg9ri-GnL36cIdGl-08EyJcIT-Vz8OXRLSu8Q5jyrsghSY8p41zMxLQ_-j-r3o0wJTx_nqfV3eXX2-23-vrm6vv283VtuGK5HgUMIFpJOyWtGKVp9NAaTmFgjTZqsB3vKA6gKTS8sRqsMg0VXSvRWMa4OK0ujrrF8u8DptzPLq17gsdwSD1XrVStkLoraHtETQwpRRz7sskM8bFntF8j7F8i7NcI--cIxT9-h5Wl</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2857853796</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus pembrolizumab and axitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma with intermediate or poor prognostic risk: a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective</title><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Open Access</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Dhanji, Nishit ; Decimoni, Tassia Cristina ; Dyer, Matthew T. D. ; May, Jessica R. ; van de Wetering, Gijs ; Petersohn, Svenja ; Nickel, Katharina ; Silva, Amanda ; Muniz, David Q. B. ; Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula</creator><creatorcontrib>Dhanji, Nishit ; Decimoni, Tassia Cristina ; Dyer, Matthew T. D. ; May, Jessica R. ; van de Wetering, Gijs ; Petersohn, Svenja ; Nickel, Katharina ; Silva, Amanda ; Muniz, David Q. B. ; Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula</creatorcontrib><description>OBJECTIVENivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) and pembrolizumab plus axitinib (PEM + AXI) have demonstrated significant clinical benefits as first-line (1 L) treatments for intermediate/poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) patients. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of NIVO + IPI versus PEM + AXI from a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective, utilizing a novel approach to estimate comparative efficacy between the treatments.METHODSA three-state partitioned survival model (progression-free, progressed, and death) was developed to estimate costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) over a 40-year time horizon. In the absence of head-to-head comparisons between NIVO + IPI and PEM + AXI, clinical data for NIVO + IPI was obtained from CheckMate 214 (NCT02231749) and for PEM + AXI from KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331). A matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted to account for the imbalance of treatment effect modifiers between the trials. Patient characteristics, resource use, health state utilities, and costs were based on Brazilian-specific sources. Costs and health outcomes were both discounted by 5% annually in line with Brazilian guidelines. The robustness of the results was evaluated through extensive sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses.RESULTSWhen comparing the matched versus unmatched OS, PFS, and TTD curves there was no noteworthy difference. NIVO + IPI was associated with cost savings (R$ 350,232), higher LYs (5.54 vs. 4.61), and QALYs (4.74 vs. 3.76) versus PEM + AXI, resulting in NIVO + IPI dominating PEM + AXI. Key model drivers were the treatment duration for PEM, NIVO, and AXI. NIVO + IPI remained dominant in all scenario analyses, which indicated that model results were robust to alternative modelling inputs or assumptions.CONCLUSIONSThis analysis shows that NIVO + IPI is estimated to be a life-extending and potentially cost-saving 1 L treatment option when compared with PEM + AXI for intermediate/poor-risk a RCC patients in the Brazilian private healthcare system.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1369-6998</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1941-837X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2023.2252716</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Journal of medical economics, 2023-12, Vol.26 (1), p.1108-1121</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-f3aba3570687d3f7c49b5c20ab149c8bd6260eba90a424d9ad8c403657ecd1123</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0999-9039 ; 0000-0003-0792-7936 ; 0000-0001-5058-7645</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dhanji, Nishit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Decimoni, Tassia Cristina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyer, Matthew T. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>May, Jessica R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van de Wetering, Gijs</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Petersohn, Svenja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nickel, Katharina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silva, Amanda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muniz, David Q. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula</creatorcontrib><title>Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus pembrolizumab and axitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma with intermediate or poor prognostic risk: a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective</title><title>Journal of medical economics</title><description>OBJECTIVENivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) and pembrolizumab plus axitinib (PEM + AXI) have demonstrated significant clinical benefits as first-line (1 L) treatments for intermediate/poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) patients. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of NIVO + IPI versus PEM + AXI from a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective, utilizing a novel approach to estimate comparative efficacy between the treatments.METHODSA three-state partitioned survival model (progression-free, progressed, and death) was developed to estimate costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) over a 40-year time horizon. In the absence of head-to-head comparisons between NIVO + IPI and PEM + AXI, clinical data for NIVO + IPI was obtained from CheckMate 214 (NCT02231749) and for PEM + AXI from KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331). A matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted to account for the imbalance of treatment effect modifiers between the trials. Patient characteristics, resource use, health state utilities, and costs were based on Brazilian-specific sources. Costs and health outcomes were both discounted by 5% annually in line with Brazilian guidelines. The robustness of the results was evaluated through extensive sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses.RESULTSWhen comparing the matched versus unmatched OS, PFS, and TTD curves there was no noteworthy difference. NIVO + IPI was associated with cost savings (R$ 350,232), higher LYs (5.54 vs. 4.61), and QALYs (4.74 vs. 3.76) versus PEM + AXI, resulting in NIVO + IPI dominating PEM + AXI. Key model drivers were the treatment duration for PEM, NIVO, and AXI. NIVO + IPI remained dominant in all scenario analyses, which indicated that model results were robust to alternative modelling inputs or assumptions.CONCLUSIONSThis analysis shows that NIVO + IPI is estimated to be a life-extending and potentially cost-saving 1 L treatment option when compared with PEM + AXI for intermediate/poor-risk a RCC patients in the Brazilian private healthcare system.</description><issn>1369-6998</issn><issn>1941-837X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kc9u1DAQxiMEElXbR0DysZcs_pPENjdY0YJUqZdW4hZN7AlrmtiL7Q1tH5JnwmHbzmHGln_6_I2-qvrA6IZRRT8y0elOa7XhlIsN5y2XrHtTnTDdsFoJ-eNtORemXqH31XlKv2gpIRiV7KT6uw0p1ziOaLJb0GNKJIzEuyVMhxkGAt4St3eTm_9fF4zpkMge5yGGyT29MvDgsvNuIM4TsAt4g5ZE9DARg1NpEI3zYQbyx-VdoTLGGa2DjCREsg9ri-GnL36cIdGl-08EyJcIT-Vz8OXRLSu8Q5jyrsghSY8p41zMxLQ_-j-r3o0wJTx_nqfV3eXX2-23-vrm6vv283VtuGK5HgUMIFpJOyWtGKVp9NAaTmFgjTZqsB3vKA6gKTS8sRqsMg0VXSvRWMa4OK0ujrrF8u8DptzPLq17gsdwSD1XrVStkLoraHtETQwpRRz7sskM8bFntF8j7F8i7NcI--cIxT9-h5Wl</recordid><startdate>20231231</startdate><enddate>20231231</enddate><creator>Dhanji, Nishit</creator><creator>Decimoni, Tassia Cristina</creator><creator>Dyer, Matthew T. D.</creator><creator>May, Jessica R.</creator><creator>van de Wetering, Gijs</creator><creator>Petersohn, Svenja</creator><creator>Nickel, Katharina</creator><creator>Silva, Amanda</creator><creator>Muniz, David Q. B.</creator><creator>Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0999-9039</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0792-7936</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5058-7645</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231231</creationdate><title>Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus pembrolizumab and axitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma with intermediate or poor prognostic risk: a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective</title><author>Dhanji, Nishit ; Decimoni, Tassia Cristina ; Dyer, Matthew T. D. ; May, Jessica R. ; van de Wetering, Gijs ; Petersohn, Svenja ; Nickel, Katharina ; Silva, Amanda ; Muniz, David Q. B. ; Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-f3aba3570687d3f7c49b5c20ab149c8bd6260eba90a424d9ad8c403657ecd1123</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dhanji, Nishit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Decimoni, Tassia Cristina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyer, Matthew T. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>May, Jessica R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van de Wetering, Gijs</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Petersohn, Svenja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nickel, Katharina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silva, Amanda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muniz, David Q. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of medical economics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dhanji, Nishit</au><au>Decimoni, Tassia Cristina</au><au>Dyer, Matthew T. D.</au><au>May, Jessica R.</au><au>van de Wetering, Gijs</au><au>Petersohn, Svenja</au><au>Nickel, Katharina</au><au>Silva, Amanda</au><au>Muniz, David Q. B.</au><au>Casagrande D. Oliveira, Ana Paula</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus pembrolizumab and axitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma with intermediate or poor prognostic risk: a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective</atitle><jtitle>Journal of medical economics</jtitle><date>2023-12-31</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1108</spage><epage>1121</epage><pages>1108-1121</pages><issn>1369-6998</issn><eissn>1941-837X</eissn><abstract>OBJECTIVENivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) and pembrolizumab plus axitinib (PEM + AXI) have demonstrated significant clinical benefits as first-line (1 L) treatments for intermediate/poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) patients. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of NIVO + IPI versus PEM + AXI from a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective, utilizing a novel approach to estimate comparative efficacy between the treatments.METHODSA three-state partitioned survival model (progression-free, progressed, and death) was developed to estimate costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) over a 40-year time horizon. In the absence of head-to-head comparisons between NIVO + IPI and PEM + AXI, clinical data for NIVO + IPI was obtained from CheckMate 214 (NCT02231749) and for PEM + AXI from KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331). A matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted to account for the imbalance of treatment effect modifiers between the trials. Patient characteristics, resource use, health state utilities, and costs were based on Brazilian-specific sources. Costs and health outcomes were both discounted by 5% annually in line with Brazilian guidelines. The robustness of the results was evaluated through extensive sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses.RESULTSWhen comparing the matched versus unmatched OS, PFS, and TTD curves there was no noteworthy difference. NIVO + IPI was associated with cost savings (R$ 350,232), higher LYs (5.54 vs. 4.61), and QALYs (4.74 vs. 3.76) versus PEM + AXI, resulting in NIVO + IPI dominating PEM + AXI. Key model drivers were the treatment duration for PEM, NIVO, and AXI. NIVO + IPI remained dominant in all scenario analyses, which indicated that model results were robust to alternative modelling inputs or assumptions.CONCLUSIONSThis analysis shows that NIVO + IPI is estimated to be a life-extending and potentially cost-saving 1 L treatment option when compared with PEM + AXI for intermediate/poor-risk a RCC patients in the Brazilian private healthcare system.</abstract><doi>10.1080/13696998.2023.2252716</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0999-9039</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0792-7936</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5058-7645</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1369-6998
ispartof Journal of medical economics, 2023-12, Vol.26 (1), p.1108-1121
issn 1369-6998
1941-837X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2857853796
source Taylor & Francis Open Access; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
title Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus pembrolizumab and axitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma with intermediate or poor prognostic risk: a Brazilian private healthcare system perspective
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T05%3A41%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost-effectiveness%20of%20nivolumab%20and%20ipilimumab%20versus%20pembrolizumab%20and%20axitinib%20in%20advanced%20renal%20cell%20carcinoma%20with%20intermediate%20or%20poor%20prognostic%20risk:%20a%20Brazilian%20private%20healthcare%20system%20perspective&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20medical%20economics&rft.au=Dhanji,%20Nishit&rft.date=2023-12-31&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1108&rft.epage=1121&rft.pages=1108-1121&rft.issn=1369-6998&rft.eissn=1941-837X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/13696998.2023.2252716&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2857853796%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2857853796&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true