Search

Katharina Verleger, 1 John R Penrod, 2 Melinda Manley Daumont, 3 Caitlyn Solem, 4 Linlin Luo, 4 Cynthia Macahilig, 5 Nadine Hertel 6 1Pharmerit International, Berlin, Germany; 2Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA; 3Bristol-Myers Squibb, Braine-L’alleud, Belgium; 4Pharmerit International, Bethesda, MD, USA; 5Medical Data Analytics, Parsippany, NJ, USA; 6Bristol-Myers Squibb, Uxbridge, UKCorrespondence: Katharina VerlegerPharmerit International, Krausenstr 8, Berlin 10117, GermanyTel +49 30 3080 7024Email kverleger@pharmerit.comPurpose: Advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC; stage IIIB/IV) presents a substantial clinical burden to society; reliable estimates of its economic burden are lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to quantify real-world health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs of patients with squamous (SQ) and non-SQ (NSQ) aNSCLC who received two or more lines of treatment (2L+) in Europe, and to describe cost-predictors.Methods: The LENS (Leading the Evaluation of Non-squamous and Squamous NSCLC) retrospective chart review study collected data from 2L+ patients with aNSCLC diagnosed between 07/2009 and 08/2011 (wave 1) or 07/2010 and 09/2012 (wave 2) in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, England, the Netherlands, and Sweden. Patients were followed from diagnosis through most recent visit/death. A weighted average of country-specific unit costs (2018 Euro) was applied to systemic anti-cancer therapy usage and HCRU (hospital/emergency department visit, surgery, radiotherapy, ancillary care, biomarker testing) to determine the total cost from aNSCLC diagnosis to death. Generalized linear models (gamma distribution, log link) were used to assess clinical and demographic predictors.Results: Of 973 2L+ aNSCLC patients, median overall survival (OS) was 1.5 years from advanced diagnosis (range: 0.2– 5.3; median OS: 1.4 [SQ], 1.6 [NSQ]), 79.0% died during follow-up. Weighted mean total per-patient costs were € 21,273, rangi

Nadine Hertel1, Robert W Kotchie1, Yevgeniy Samyshkin1, Matthew Radford1, Samantha Humphreys2, Kevin Jameson21IMS Consulting Group, London, UK; 2MSD Ltd, Hoddesdon, UKPurpose: Frequent exacerbations which are both costly and potentially life-threatening are a major concern to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), despite the availability of several treatment options. This study aimed to assess the lifetime costs and outcomes associated with alternative treatment regimens for patients with severe COPD in the UK setting.Patients and methods: A Markov cohort model was developed to predict lifetime costs, outcomes, and cost-effectiveness of various combinations of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), a long-acting beta agonist (LABA), an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), and roflumilast in a fully incremental analysis. Patients willing and able to take ICS, and those refusing or intolerant to ICS were analyzed separately. Efficacy was expressed as relative rate ratios of COPD exacerbation associated with alternative treatment regimens, taken from a mixed treatment comparison. The analysis was conducted from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Parameter uncertainty was explored using one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.Results: Based on the results of the fully incremental analysis a cost-effectiveness frontier was determined, indicating those treatment regimens which represent the most cost-effective use of NHS resources. For ICS-tolerant patients the cost-effectiveness frontier suggested LAMA as initial treatment. Where patients continue to exacerbate and additional therapy is required, LAMA + LABA/ICS can be a cost-effective option, followed by LAMA + LABA/ICS + roflumilast (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] versus LAMA + LABA/ICS: £16,566 per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained). The ICER in ICS-intolerant patients, comparing LAMA + LABA + roflumilast versus LAMA + LABA, was £13,764