A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab as an adjuvant treatment of renal cell carcinoma post-nephrectomy in Switzerland. | LitMetric

Aims: Pembrolizumab has demonstrated significantly prolonged disease-free survival and overall survival (OS) among adult patients post-nephrectomy who have an intermediate-high risk, high-risk, or M1 stage with no evidence of disease (M1 NED) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with clear cell component. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for patients with RCC post-nephrectomy versus observation in Switzerland.

Materials And Methods: A previously published Markov model was adapted for the Swiss setting to estimate the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus observation from the Swiss statutory health insurance perspective. Transition probabilities between model states were estimated using survival curves from KEYNOTE-564 (data cut-off: 14 June 2021). Outcomes included costs (2022 Swiss francs [CHF]), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and life-years (LYs), measured over a lifetime horizon. Costs included drug acquisition and administration for adjuvant and subsequent therapy. Both costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3.0% annually. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a hypothetical willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of CHF 100,000. Sensitivity was assessed through scenario analyses as well as deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results: Over a lifetime horizon, the total incremental cost for pembrolizumab versus observation was CHF 59,089, providing incremental gains of 0.90 QALYs (1.07 LYs); the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was CHF 65,299/QALY. Pembrolizumab was deemed cost-effective versus observation, with a 69.9% probability of cost-effectiveness.

Limitations: A more recent interim analysis data cut from KEYNOTE-564 with median follow up of 57.2 months has since been published; however, these were not available at the time of analysis. It would likely have minimal impact on transition probabilities from disease-free, and the current approach remains conservative for predicting OS for pembrolizumab.

Conclusions: As an adjuvant treatment of RCC post-nephrectomy, pembrolizumab was found to be cost-effective versus observation in Switzerland at a WTP threshold of CHF 100,000/QALY. Policy makers should consider pembrolizumab as an adjuvant treatment for patients with RCC post-nephrectomy when making decisions regarding resource allocation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2024.2417523DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

versus observation
20
adjuvant treatment
12
rcc post-nephrectomy
12
cost-effectiveness pembrolizumab
8
pembrolizumab adjuvant
8
renal cell
8
cell carcinoma
8
patients rcc
8
pembrolizumab versus
8
transition probabilities
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!