Axicabtagene ciloleucel compared to standard of care in Swedish patients with large B-cell lymphoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis of the ZUMA-7 trial

Résumé fourni par la source

AIM: Our study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), compared to standard of care (SOC) in Sweden for second-line (2L) treatment of adult transplant-intended diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients who relapse within 12 months from completion of, or are refractory to (early r/r), first-line (1L) chemoimmunotherapy. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness was assessed using a three-state partitioned survival model. Mixture cure models were used to extrapolate time-to-event data from the ZUMA-7 trial (NCT03391466) beyond the observational period. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to test the robustness of the base case results, including an analysis that assumed no switching to off-protocol CAR T-cell therapy in subsequent lines in the SOC arm. RESULTS: The model estimated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of SEK 534,704 (EUR 50,303) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained over a lifetime horizon of 50 years, with an incremental cost of SEK 812,944 (EUR 76,479) and incremental QALY of 1.52 for axi-cel compared with SOC. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that axi-cel was cost-effective in 73% of the simulations when assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of SEK 1,000,000 (EUR 94,077) per QALY. The ICER was SEK 694,351 (EUR 65,313) in the scenario analysis where the costs and effects of treatment switching were not included. CONCLUSION: 2L treatment with axi-cel in transplant-intended DLBCL patients with early r/r after completing 1L chemoimmunotherapy was cost-effective compared to SOC in a Swedish setting. Administering axi-cel in 2L is cost-effective as it enhances the possibility of curing more patients, resulting in not just a survival advantage, but also a reduction in the burden on quality of life and cost of subsequent therapy. This will be advantageous to both patients and society.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.