Economic Analysis of Ceritinib Used As Second-Line Versus Third-Line Treatment for Patients with ALK-rearranged Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer.

Bin Wu,Hongchao Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.e18355

IF: 45.3

2019-01-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:e18355 Background: Targeted therapy with ceritinib notably improves survival in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement tumors after the failure of chemotherapy and crizotinib. However, the economic outcome of ceritinib used as the second-line versus third-line treatment is still unclear. Methods: A mathematical model was constructed to project 21-day patient transitions. The clinical data were primarily extracted from the ASCEND-5 trial. The health resource consumption data were estimated from the perspective of the Chinese health care system. The cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was measured in a 10-year time horizon. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the impact of uncertainties. Results: Comparing with the 3rd-line strategy, ceritinib 2nd-line strategy achieved the comparable life years and additional 0.06 QALYs with the less cost of $6,694 (Table), which suggested that ceritinib used as 2nd-line treatment is a dominant strategy. The utility of disease-free survival and the cost of ceritinib were the factors that had the considerable impact on the model outcomes. Conclusions: These results indicate that ceritinib used in 2nd-line setting is a more favorable treatment option than in the 3rd-line setting. [Table: see text]