Cost-effectiveness and Net Monetary Benefit of Durvalumab Consolidation Therapy Versus No Consolidation Therapy After Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in the Italian National Health Service.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and net monetary benefit of durvalumab consolidation therapy compared with no consolidation therapy after chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer with programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 expression ≥1% from the Italian National Health Service perspective.
Methods: We developed a 12-month decision tree combined with a lifetime cohort Markov model in which patients were assigned to receive durvalumab consolidation therapy or active follow-up (Italian standard of care) after chemoradiotherapy to compare cost-effectiveness and net monetary benefit of the two strategies during a 40-year period. Clinical outcomes data were obtained from the respective clinical trials and extrapolated using survival analysis; cost data were derived from Italian official sources and relevant real-world studies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, incremental cost-utility ratio, and incremental net monetary benefit were computed and compared against a 16,372 € per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) willingness-to-pay threshold. We performed deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to assess how uncertainty affected results; we also performed scenario analyses to compare results under different pricing settings.
Findings: In the base-case scenario, during a 40-year period, the total costs for patients treated with durvalumab consolidation therapy and active follow-up were €59,860 and €49,840 respectively; life-years gained were 3.47 and 3.31, respectively; and QALYs gained were 2.73 and 2.50, respectively, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €62,131 per life-year, an incremental cost-utility ratio of €42,322 per QALY, and an incremental net monetary benefit of €-6,144. We found that durvalumab was cost-effective (incremental net monetary benefit = 0) when a discount of 13% and 30% on its official price was applied, considering all other drugs priced according to official or maximum selling prices, respectively. Results were most sensitive to the progression-free survival rate for durvalumab and active follow-up, health utility in progression-free state, and price of subsequent treatments.
Implications: Our analysis indicates that durvalumab consolidation is cost-effective when a discount is applied on its official price. These results suggest that durvalumab may deliver an incremental health benefit with a contained upfront cost during a 40-year period, from the Italian National Health Service perspective, providing added value in a potentially curative care setting.
Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Grossi reports serving an advisory role for ad hoc advisory boards/consultations (last 3 years) for Eli Lilly, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Merck, and Otsuka; receiving honoraria for seminars or talks to industry (last 3 years) for Eli Lilly, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, AMGEN, Celgene, BMS, and MSD; and receiving research funding (last 3 years) from AstraZeneca, BMS, and MSD. The authors have indicated that they have no other conflicts of interest regarding the content of this article.
(Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)