The Cost Effectiveness of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel Versus Best Supportive Care in the Treatment of Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma (LBCL) After Two or More Lines of Systemic Therapy in Canada
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) received marketing authorisation in Canada for the treatment of relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma after two or more lines of systemic therapy, and the clinical and economic value of axi-cel to patients and the healthcare system should be examined. The objective of this analysis is to determine, from societal and public healthcare payer perspectives, the cost effectiveness of axi-cel versus best supportive care for patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma in Canada. METHODS: A pharmacoeconomic model was developed and populated with clinical data derived from the ZUMA-1 and SCHOLAR-1 studies using a propensity score-matched comparison. A partitioned survival mixture-cure modelling approach was taken to characterise the potential curative effect of axi-cel therapy in large B-cell lymphoma. Healthcare resource utilisation and adverse event data were based on results from ZUMA-1, and utility values were derived from ZUMA-1 data supplemented with published literature. Costs (in 2021 Canadian dollars) were taken from publicly available Canadian cost databases and published literature. Benefits and costs were discounted at 1.5% per year, and sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the results. RESULTS: In the base case, axi-cel generated an incremental 6.2 life-years compared to best supportive care, corresponding to 4.6 additional quality-adjusted life-years, and was associated with $606,010 in additional costs. The incremental cost-utility ratio was $132,747 per quality-adjusted life-year gained compared with best supportive care from a societal perspective ($106,392 per quality-adjusted life-year gained from a public healthcare payer perspective). Key drivers of the analysis included progression-free survival and overall survival values for axi-cel. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis suggest that axi-cel may be considered a cost-effective allocation of resources compared with best supportive care for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma in Canada.
