We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing to browse this site, you accept our cookie policy.×
Skip main navigation
Aging Health
Bioelectronics in Medicine
Biomarkers in Medicine
Breast Cancer Management
CNS Oncology
Colorectal Cancer
Concussion
Epigenomics
Future Cardiology
Future Medicine AI
Future Microbiology
Future Neurology
Future Oncology
Future Rare Diseases
Future Virology
Hepatic Oncology
HIV Therapy
Immunotherapy
International Journal of Endocrine Oncology
International Journal of Hematologic Oncology
Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine
Lung Cancer Management
Melanoma Management
Nanomedicine
Neurodegenerative Disease Management
Pain Management
Pediatric Health
Personalized Medicine
Pharmacogenomics
Regenerative Medicine

Cost–effectiveness analysis of nivolumab in the second-line treatment for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

    Peng-Fei Zhang

    Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China

    West China Biomedical Big Data Center, West China Hospital/West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China

    ,
    Dan Xie

    Prenatal Diagnosis Center, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China

    &
    Qiu Li

    *Author for correspondence: Tel.: +86 28 8542 3262; Fax: +86 28 8542 3609;

    E-mail Address: liqiu@scu.edu.cn

    Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China

    West China Biomedical Big Data Center, West China Hospital/West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China

    Published Online:https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2019-0821

    Background: To investigate the cost–effectiveness of nivolumab versus chemotherapy in the second-line treatment for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Materials & methods: A Markov model reflecting the patients in the ATTRACTION-3 trial was established. Weibull survival model was employed to fit the Kaplan–Meier progression-free survival and overall survival probabilities of the nivolumab and chemotherapy strategy, respectively. Meanwhile, one-way and PSA were performed to test the uncertainty in the model. Results: Overall, the incremental effectiveness and cost of nivolumab versus chemotherapy were 0.107 quality-adjusted life-years and $14,627.90, resulting in an incremental cost–effectiveness ratio of $136,709.35/quality-adjusted life-year. Conclusion: Nivolumab is not a cost-effective treatment option compared with chemotherapy from the perspective of Chinese society.

    Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

    References

    • 1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 68(6), 394–424 (2018).
    • 2. Abbasi BA, Iqbal J, Ahmad R et al. Potential phytochemicals in the prevention and treatment of esophagus cancer: a green therapeutic approach. Pharmacol. Rep. 71(4), 644–652 (2019).
    • 3. Eslick GD. Epidemiology of esophageal cancer. Gastroenterol. Clin. North Am. 38(1), 17–25 (2009).
    • 4. Pennathur A, Gibson MK, Jobe BA, Luketich JD. Oesophageal carcinoma. Lancet 381(9864), 400–412 (2013).
    • 5. Abnet CC, Arnold M, Wei WQ. Epidemiology of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Gastroenterology 154(2), 360–373 (2017).
    • 6. Stahl M, Mariette C, Haustermans K, Cervantes A, Arnold D, Group EGW. Oesophageal cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 24(Suppl. 6), vi51–56 (2013). • Current guidelines on the management of esophageal cancer.
    • 7. Yoshino T, Arnold D, Taniguchi H et al. Pan-Asian adapted ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer; a JSMO – ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, KACO, MOS, SSO and TOS. Ann. Oncol. 29(1), 44–70 (2018). • Current guidelines on the management of esophageal cancer.
    • 8. Kitagawa Y, Uno T, Oyama T et al. Esophageal cancer practice guidelines 2017 edited by the Japan esophageal society: part 2. Esophagus 16(1), 25–43 (2019). • Current guidelines on the management of esophageal cancer.
    • 9. Jimenez P, Pathak A, Phan AT. The role of taxanes in the management of gastroesphageal cancer. J. Gastrointest. Oncol. 2(4), 240–249 (2011).
    • 10. Ken K, Makoto T, Shuichi H et al. A Phase II study of paclitaxel by weekly 1-h infusion for advanced or recurrent esophageal cancer in patients who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy. Cancer Chemoth. Pharm. 67(6), 1265–1272 (2011).
    • 11. Muro K, Hamaguchi T, Ohtsu A et al. A Phase II study of single-agent docetaxel in patients with metastatic esophageal cancer. Ann. Oncol. 15(6), 955–959 (2004).
    • 12. Hossein B, Luis PA, Leora H et al. Nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. New Engl. J. Med. 373(17), 123–135 (2015).
    • 13. Antonia SJ, López-Martin JA, Bendell J et al. Nivolumab alone and nivolumab plus ipilimumab in recurrent small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 032): a multicentre, open-label, Phase I/II trial. Lancet Oncol. 17(7), 883–895 (2016).
    • 14. Wolchok JD, Harriet K, Callahan MK et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. New Engl. J. Med. 369(2), 122 (2013).
    • 15. Mazza C, Escudier B, Albiges L. Nivolumab in renal cell carcinoma: latest evidence and clinical potential. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 9(3), 171 (2017).
    • 16. Jiang Y, Lo AWI, Wong A et al. Prognostic significance of tumor-infiltrating immune cells and PD-L1 expression in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Oncotarget 8(18), 30175–30189 (2017).
    • 17. Zhang W, Pang Q, Yu SF, Yuan Z, Wang P, Xiao Z. PD-L1 is prognostic factor of human esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and its association with EGFR in radiation therapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 96(2), S29 (2016).
    • 18. Kudo T, Hamamoto Y, Kato K et al. Nivolumab treatment for oesophageal squamous-cell carcinoma: an open-label, multicentre, Phase II trial. Lancet Oncol. 18(5), 631–639 (2017).
    • 19. Kato K, Cho BC, Takahashi M et al. Nivolumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma refractory or intolerant to previous chemotherapy (ATTRACTION-3): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, Phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 20(11), 1506–1517 (2019). •• This is the full publication of the ATTRACTION3 study.
    • 20. Murray CJ, Evans DB, Acharya A, Baltussen RM. Development of WHO guidelines on generalized cost–effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 9(3), 235–251 (2000). •• This is the guideline on how to establish a cost–effectiveness analysis.
    • 21. Wu B, Ye M, Chen H, Shen JF. Costs of trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy for HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: an economic evaluation in the Chinese context. Clin. Ther. 34(2), 468–479 (2012).
    • 22. Wu B, Li T, Cai J, Xu Y, Zhao G. Cost–effectiveness analysis of adjuvant chemotherapies in patients presenting with gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy. BMC Cancer 14(1), 984 (2014).
    • 23. Tan C, Peng L, Zeng X et al. Cost–utility analysis of the newly recommended adjuvant chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer patients in the 2011 Chinese national comprehensive cancer network (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines in oncology: gastric cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 32(3), 235–243 (2014).
    • 24. Bai Y, Xu Y, Wu B. Cost–effectiveness and budget impact analysis of apatinib for advanced metastatic gastric cancer from the perspective of health insurance system. Gastroent. Res. Pract. 2017(1), 1–7 (2017).
    • 25. Wu B, Zhang Q, Sun J. Cost–effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line therapy in advanced renal-cell carcinoma. J. Immunother. Cancer 6(1), 124 (2018).
    • 26. Lu S, Ye M, Ding L, Tan F, Fu J, Wu B. Cost–effectiveness of gefitinib, icotinib, and pemetrexed-based chemotherapy as first-line treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer in China. Oncotarget 8(6), 9996–10006 (2017).
    • 27. Saito S, Muneoka Y, Ishikawa T, Akazawa K. Cost–effectiveness of paclitaxel + ramucirumab combination therapy for advanced gastric cancer progressing after first-line chemotherapy in Japan. Clin. Ther. 39(12), 2380–2388 (2017).
    • 28. Dieleman JL, Campbell M, Chapin A et al. Future and potential spending on health 2015–40: development assistance for health, and government, prepaid private, and out-of-pocket health spending in 184 countries. Lancet 389(10083), 2005–2030 (2017). • Describes the future and potential spending on healthcare worldwide.
    • 29. Dieleman JL, Templin T, Sadat N et al. National spending on health by source for 184 countries between 2013 and 2040. Lancet 387(10037), 2521–2535 (2016). • Describes the future and potential spending on healthcare worldwide.
    • 30. Sassan O, Jin GC, Jacqueline NC et al. Cost–effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic gastric and esophageal tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 36(Suppl. 4), 56–56 (2018).