Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of avelumab plus axitinib versus pembrolizumab plus axitinib, ipilimumab plus nivolumab, and sunitnib for advanced renal cell carcinoma in the U.K. Perspective.

Authors

Ramon Andrade B De Mello

Ramon Andrade De Mello

Precision Oncology and Health Economics Lab (OncoPrecH Group), Department of Clinical and Experimental Oncology, Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, Brazil

Ramon Andrade De Mello , Emili Ayoub , Pedro Castelo-Branco , Victor Andre De Almeida Zia , Andre Savio , Daniel Humberto Pozza , Hakaru Tadokoro , Nelson Teich

Organizations

Precision Oncology and Health Economics Lab (OncoPrecH Group), Department of Clinical and Experimental Oncology, Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, Brazil, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil, Algarve Biomedical Center, Regenerative Medicine Program, University of Algarve, Faro, Portugal, Intermédica Medical Oncology Centre, São Paulo, Brazil, Nove de Julho University, Bauru, Brazil, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal, Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, Brazil, Health Economics Programme University of York, York, United Kingdom

Research Funding

No funding received
None.

Background: Avelulmab plus axitinib showed to improve clinical outcomes for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) in the JAVELIN RENAL 101 trial. Several other immunocheckpints inihibitos (ICIs) options acquired a main role in the aRCC treatment, such as nivolumab plus ipilimumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib. Our aim is to evaluate the cost effectiveness of avelumab/axitinib versus other FDA approved options for previously untreated patients with aRCC. Methods: A Markov model was used to estimate the costs and health outcomes of treatment of aRCC with sunitinib, or avelumab plus axitinib. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the robustness of the model outcomes. The primary outputs of the model included the total cost, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: Avelumab plus axitinib provided and 4.77 additional QALY benefit. Total cost per patient was US$ 174,725 for avelumab/axitinib, US$ 178,725 for pembrolizumab/axitinib, US$ 169,390 for ipilimumab/nivolumab and US$ 97,846 for sunitnib. Avelumab/axitinib showed to be more cost-effective (ICER US$ 28,011/QALY) when compared to pembrolizumab/axitinib (ICER US$ 47,916/QALY) and ipilumumab/nivolumab (ICER US$ 95,392/QALY). Conclusions: Avelumab/axitinib is likely to be more cost-effective than ipilimumab/nivolumab, pembrolizumab/axitinib and sunitinib in the UK perspective. However further models, market discounts and stakeholders price negotiations could lead to variations of this scenario across the globe.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session C: Renal Cell Cancer

Track

Renal Cell Cancer

Sub Track

Therapeutics

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38, 2020 (suppl 6; abstr 689)

Abstract #

689

Poster Bd #

G9

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts