Cost-effectiveness of iruplinalkib versus crizotinib in first-line anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients in China

在中国,伊鲁普利尼与克唑替尼一线治疗间变性淋巴瘤激酶阳性晚期非小细胞肺癌患者的成本效益分析

阅读:2

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The recently completed INSPIRE trial demonstrated that iruplinalkib improved progression-free survival and intracranial antitumor activity compared with crizotinib in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) -positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The objective of this study was to determine the potential cost-effectiveness of iruplinalkib vs. crizotinib in the Chinese healthcare setting. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness model was developed using the partition survival method, with three health states: progression-free survival, progressive disease, and death. Data from the INSPIRE trial were used to estimate progression-free and overall survival. Costs included drug treatment, disease management, and adverse events management. Drug costs and utilities were the main drivers of the model in the deterministic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Treatment with iruplinalkib versus crizotinib resulted in a gain of 0.55 life-years, 2.11 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and an incremental cost of $4,325.55, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2,048.03/QALY. Drug costs and utilities were the main drivers of the model in the deterministic sensitivity analysis. From the probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), iruplinalkib had a 100% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $13,447.89/QALY. CONCLUSION: Compared to crizotinib, iruplinalkib is a cost-effective therapy for treatment-naïve patients with ALK-positive NSCLC.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。