Cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab vs. chemotherapy as second-line treatment for advanced esophageal carcinoma in the United States

Jia Hu,Zhuomiao Ye,Zhe Xu,Zhinan Hao,Yongjun Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.941738

IF: 5.2

2022-12-10

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract:Background: The national Comprehensive Cancer Network has suggested pembrolizumab as a second-line therapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients with a programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 10. However, despite the increased survival rate associated with pembrolizumab in these patient population, the high cost of pembrolizumab may influence its antitumor effect. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab compared to chemotherapy as second-line treatments for esophageal carcinoma (EC) based on KEYNOTE-181 trial. Methods: A Markov model was constructed using TreeAge 2021 based on three different groups: all intent-to-treat patients (ITT population), patients with ESCC (ESCC population), and patients with a PD-L1 CPS ≥10 (CPS ≥10 population). Incremental cost, Incremental effect, Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost–effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. Analyses were conducted on the setting of a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 from the US perspective. Results: The ICERs for pembrolizumab were 60,238.823 per QALY, and 150,000, suggesting that pembrolizumab was not a cost-effective treatment scheme in patients with a PD-L1 CPS ≤ 10 or esophageal adenocarcinoma. The ICER was < $150,000 in the ESCC and CPS≥10 populations, indicating that pembrolizumab was cost-effective in these two subgroups. Conclusion: The determining of pembrolizumab as a cost-effective second-line therapy for EC in the United States depends on the histologic type and PD-L1 expression.

public, environmental & occupational health