Search

The objective of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of KTE-X19 versus standard of care (SoC) in the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) post-Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) treatment from a UK healthcare perspective. A three-state partitioned survival model (pre-progression, post-progression and death) with a cycle length of one month was used to extrapolate progression-free and overall survival over a lifetime horizon. Population inputs along with KTE-X19 (brexucabtagene autoleucel) efficacy and safety data were derived from the single-arm trial ZUMA-2 (NCT02601313). The composition of SoC was informed by a literature-based meta-analysis, SoC efficacy data were obtained from the SCHOLAR-2 real-world study. Survival was modelled using standard parametric curves for SoC and a mixture-cure methodology for KTE-X19. It was assumed that patients whose disease had not progressed after five years experienced long-term remission. Costs, resource use and utility, and adverse event disutility inputs were obtained from published literature and publicly available data sources. An annual discount rate of 3.5% was applied to costs and health outcomes. Modelled outcomes for KTE-X19 and SoC included expected life years (LY), quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and total costs. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were performed. Estimated median survival was 5.96 years for KTE-X19 and 1.38 for SoC. Discounted LYs, QALYs and lifetime costs were 8.27, 5.99 and £385,765 for KTE-X19 versus 1.98, 1.48 and £79,742 for SoC, respectively. The KTE-X19 versus SoC cost per QALY was £67,713 and the cost per LY was £48,645. Influential scenario analyses use alternative KTE-X19 survival curves and discount rates, and shorter time horizons. Considering the survival and quality of life benefits compared to SoC, KTE-X19 for R/R MCL appears as a cost-effective treatment in the real-world UK setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The objective of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of KTE-X19 versus standard of care (SoC) in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients from a US healthcare perspective. Materials and methods: A three-state partitioned-survival model (pre-progression, post-progression, and death) with a cycle length of 1 month was used to extrapolate progression-free and overall survival (OS) over a lifetime horizon. Due to the long tail of the OS curve, OS was modeled applying a mixture-cure methodology, using the assumption that patients whose disease had not progressed after 5 years experienced long-term remission. Population inputs were derived from the ZUMA-2 trial. This was also the source of KTE-X19 efficacy and safety data, while this data was obtained from the literature for SoC. Costs and resource use inputs were derived from the published literature and publicly available data sources. Health state utilities were derived from the ZUMA-2 trial (NCT02601313), applying the US tariff. Adverse event disutilities were derived from the published literature. Costs and health outcomes were discounted at 3% per year. The model estimated expected life years (LY), qualityadjusted life years (QALY), and total costs for KTE-X19 vs SoC. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Median survival was 9.71 years for KTE-X19 and 2.13 for SoC. Discounted LYs, QALYs, and lifetime costs were 8.99, 7.39, and $693,832 for KTE-X19 vs 4.47, 3.65, and $574,263 for SoC, respectively. The KTE-X19 vs SoC cost per QALY was $31,985. The most influential model parameter was the utility for patients with long-term remission. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the probability that KTE-X19 was cost-effective was 99%. Conclusion: The treatment of R/R MCL with KTE-X19 presents a potentially cost-effective alternative to the current SoC, deriving its value from incremental survival and health-related quality-of-life benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of KTE-X19 versus standard of care (SoC) in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients from a US healthcare perspective. A three-state partitioned-survival model (pre-progression, post-progression, and death) with a cycle length of 1 month was used to extrapolate progression-free and overall survival (OS) over a lifetime horizon. Due to the long tail of the OS curve, OS was modeled applying a mixture–cure methodology, using the assumption that patients whose disease had not progressed after 5 years experienced long-term remission. Population inputs were derived from the ZUMA-2 trial. This was also the source of KTE-X19 efficacy and safety data, while this data was obtained from the literature for SoC. Costs and resource use inputs were derived from the published literature and publicly available data sources. Health state utilities were derived from the ZUMA-2 trial (NCT02601313), applying the US tariff. Adverse event disutilities were derived from the published literature. Costs and health outcomes were discounted at 3% per year. The model estimated expected life years (LY), quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and total costs for KTE-X19 vs SoC. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Median survival was 9.71 years for KTE-X19 and 2.13 for SoC. Discounted LYs, QALYs, and lifetime costs were 8.99, 7.39, and $693,832 for KTE-X19 vs 4.47, 3.65, and $574,263 for SoC, respectively. The KTE-X19 vs SoC cost per QALY was $31,985. The most influential model parameter was the utility for patients with long-term remission. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the probability that KTE-X19 was cost-effective was 99%. The treatment of R/R MCL with KTE-X19 presents a potentially cost-effective alternative to the current SoC, deriving its value from incremental survival and health-related quality-of-life benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]