TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Treating Patients With NTRK-Positive Cancer With the Histology-Independent Therapy Entrectinib
AU - HEcoPerMed consortium
AU - Huygens, Simone
AU - Vellekoop, Heleen
AU - Versteegh, Matthijs
AU - Santi, Irene
AU - Szilberhorn, László
AU - Zelei, Tamás
AU - Nagy, Balázs
AU - Tsiachristas, Apostolos
AU - Koleva-Kolarova, Rositsa
AU - Wordsworth, Sarah
AU - Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen
N1 - Funding/Support: The HEcoPerMed project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under
grant agreement number 824997.
Publisher Copyright: © 2022 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, Inc.
PY - 2022/10/10
Y1 - 2022/10/10
N2 - Objectives: This study tackles several challenges of evaluating histology-independent treatments using entrectinib as an example. Histology-independent treatments are provided based on genetic marker(s) of tumors, regardless of the tumor type. We evaluated the lifetime cost-effectiveness of testing all patients for NTRK fusions and treating the positive cases with entrectinib compared with no testing and standard of care (SoC) for all patients. Methods: The health economic model consisted of a decision tree reflecting the NTRK testing phase followed by a microsimulation model reflecting treatment with either entrectinib or SoC. Efficacy of entrectinib was based on data from basket trials, whereas historical data from NTRK-negative patients were corrected for the prognostic value of NTRK fusions to model SoC. Results: “Testing” (testing for NTRK fusions, with subsequent entrectinib treatment in NTRK-positive patients and SoC in NTRK-negative patients) had higher per-patient quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs than “No testing” (SoC for all patients), with a difference of 0.0043 and €732, respectively. This corresponded to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €169 957/QALY and, using a cost-effectiveness threshold of €80 000/QALY, an incremental net monetary benefit of −€388. When excluding the costs of genetic testing for NTRK fusions, the ICER was reduced to €36 290/QALY and the incremental net monetary benefit increased to €188. Conclusions: When treatment requires the identification of a genetic marker, the associated costs and effects need to be accounted for. Because of the low prevalence of NTRK fusions, the number needed-to-test to identify patients eligible for entrectinib is large. Excluding the testing phase reduces the ICER substantially.
AB - Objectives: This study tackles several challenges of evaluating histology-independent treatments using entrectinib as an example. Histology-independent treatments are provided based on genetic marker(s) of tumors, regardless of the tumor type. We evaluated the lifetime cost-effectiveness of testing all patients for NTRK fusions and treating the positive cases with entrectinib compared with no testing and standard of care (SoC) for all patients. Methods: The health economic model consisted of a decision tree reflecting the NTRK testing phase followed by a microsimulation model reflecting treatment with either entrectinib or SoC. Efficacy of entrectinib was based on data from basket trials, whereas historical data from NTRK-negative patients were corrected for the prognostic value of NTRK fusions to model SoC. Results: “Testing” (testing for NTRK fusions, with subsequent entrectinib treatment in NTRK-positive patients and SoC in NTRK-negative patients) had higher per-patient quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs than “No testing” (SoC for all patients), with a difference of 0.0043 and €732, respectively. This corresponded to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €169 957/QALY and, using a cost-effectiveness threshold of €80 000/QALY, an incremental net monetary benefit of −€388. When excluding the costs of genetic testing for NTRK fusions, the ICER was reduced to €36 290/QALY and the incremental net monetary benefit increased to €188. Conclusions: When treatment requires the identification of a genetic marker, the associated costs and effects need to be accounted for. Because of the low prevalence of NTRK fusions, the number needed-to-test to identify patients eligible for entrectinib is large. Excluding the testing phase reduces the ICER substantially.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85139726991&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jval.2022.08.006
DO - 10.1016/j.jval.2022.08.006
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85139726991
SN - 1098-3015
VL - 26
SP - 193
EP - 203
JO - Value in Health
JF - Value in Health
IS - 2
ER -