Search

Background: This study reported the safety and efficacy of a phase 2, open-label, single-arm, exploratory clinical trial of induction immunochemotherapy in patients with initially unresectable advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC)., Patients and Methods: Patients underwent three cycles of induction therapy with tislelizumab, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil. The primary endpoints were the safety, major pathological response (MPR), and pathological complete response (pCR). Secondary endpoints included the R0 resection rate, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). Genomic data and immune microenvironment data were analyzed exploratively., Results: The treatment was safe, with a grade 3 or higher adverse event rate of 14.9% (7/47). Of the total 47 patients enrolled in the study, 19 (40.4%) achieved MPR, 12 (25.5%) achieved pCR, 4 (8.5%) achieved complete clinical response (cCR) and declined surgery, and 23 (48.94%) underwent successful resection. Median follow-up was 18 months, with a median DFS of 24 months, a median OS of 36 months. A high tumor mutation burden was associated with a better prognosis for patients who underwent surgery. Patients who achieved pCR had higher levels of immune cell infiltration and a greater proportion and concentration of tertiary lymphoid structures compared with those who experienced a major pathological response., Conclusions: Tislelizumab combined with chemotherapy is effective for ESCC, yielding high cCR, pCR, surgical conversion, and R0 resection rates, and tolerable adverse events., Trial Registration: NCT05469061., (© 2024. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

The RATIONALE-306 study revealed that patients with advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) could benefit from treatment with tislelizumab plus chemotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy for treating OSCC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Partitioned survival model estimated the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone for treating OSCC using RATIONALE-306 data. Costs and utilities were obtained from local databases and published studies. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), incremental net health benefits (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB) were outcomes. Price simulation were conducted at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to assess model robustness. Compared with chemotherapy alone, tislelizumab plus chemotherapy yielded an ICER of USD 27,896/QALY, gained an additional 0.414 QALYs and 0.751 life-years, and increased the cost by USD 11,560. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that tislelizumab plus chemotherapy was cost-effective at the WTP of USD 38,258/QALY with probability of 94.43%. When the price in China was less than USD 3.714 per mg, the price simulation results indicated that tislelizumab plus chemotherapy was cost-effective at a WTP threshold of USD 38,258. Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy yielded an INHB of 0.112 QALYs and an INMB of USD 4,279 compared with chemotherapy alone at a WTP threshold of USD 38,258. Based on the sensitivity analyses, the above results were stable. A general trend was observed for subgroups with better survival benefits related to a higher probability of cost-effectiveness. From the Chinese healthcare perspective, tislelizumab plus chemotherapy is more cost-effective than chemotherapy alone as a first-line therapy for OSCC. These findings can help clinicians make optimal clinical decisions and assist decision-makers in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab in clinical practice., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Several economic studies have assessed the cost-effectiveness of programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors compared to second-line chemotherapy in treating esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, there is a lack of economic comparisons among the different PD-1 inhibitors., Aim: This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of PD-1 inhibitors (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, camrelizumab, and tislelizumab) in second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic ESCC within the Chinese healthcare system., Method: The clinical trials were systematically retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. We established a fractional polynomials model to conduct a network meta-analysis, enabling the calculation of hazard ratios and expected survival rates. Economic outcomes were estimated using a partitioned survival model. The costs and utilities were gathered from published sources. The threshold for willingness-to-pay (WTP) for a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was set at three times China's per capita gross domestic product in 2022. Sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed to address uncertainties in the model., Results: Four phase III randomized controlled trials were included, evaluating the cost-effectiveness of four PD-1 inhibitors, camrelizumab, nivolumab, tislelizumab, and pembrolizumab, compared to chemotherapy for the second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic ESCC. For camrelizumab, nivolumab, tislelizumab, and pembrolizumab, the corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $27,375.43/QALY, $205,312.19/QALY, $9,266.73/QALY, and $220,368.10/QALY, respectively. The SA results indicated the robustness of the base analysis findings., Conclusion: From the Chinese healthcare system, under the WTP of $38,253.48/QALY, tislelizumab is a cost-effective treatment option for the second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic ESCC., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background: Esophageal carcinoma is a type of cancer that occurs in the esophagus. For patients with locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who have either experienced disease progression following first-line standard chemotherapy or are intolerant to it, the prognosis is typically poor. Additionally, these patients often bear a substantial economic burden during the course of their treatment. Tislelizumab is a selective PD-1 inhibitor with efficacy proven in locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab versus camrelizumab as the second-line treatment in locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients in China., Methods: From the perspective of China's healthcare system, the partitioned survival model with three health states was established in a 3-week cycle and a lifetime horizon. Anchored matching adjusted indirect comparison was used for survival analyses based on individual patient data from RATIONALE 302 trial and the published ESCORT study due to the lack of head-to-head clinical trials. Only direct medical costs were included. Costs and utility values were derived from local charges, the published literature, and related databases. Sensitivity analyses and a scenario analysis were also performed to verify the robustness of the model results., Results: Compared with camrelizumab monotherapy, tislelizumab monotherapy incurred a lower lifetime cost ($8,346 vs. $8,851) and yielded higher quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (0.87 vs. 0.63), which resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of -$2,051/QALY. Tislelizumab monotherapy is a dominant option over camrelizumab monotherapy in China. The three primary parameters upon which this result was most sensitive were the unit cost of camrelizumab, the unit cost of tislelizumab, and the duration of reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation (RCCEP). According to the probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), tislelizumab monotherapy was 100% cost-effective when the WTP was 1-3 times GDP per capita in China($11,207/QALY∼$33,621/QALY). Scenario analysis showed that the result was consistent., Conclusion: Tislelizumab monotherapy is a dominant option compared with camrelizumab monotherapy as the second-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic ESCC in China., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated superior clinical efficacy in prolonging overall survival (OS) as the second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and were recommended by the guidelines. However, it remains uncertain which ICI is the most cost-effective. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of ICIs as the second-line treatment for ESCC based on the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system., Methods: A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to obtain the Hazard ratios (HRs) for indirect comparisons. A three-state Markov model with a 10-year time horizon was conducted to assess the cost-effectiveness. The state transition probabilities were calculated with Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves data from clinical trial and HRs from the NMA. Utilities and costs were derived from local charges or previously published studies. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to examine model robustness. The results were assessed based on the total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs)., Results: Five clinical trials (ATTRACTION-3, ESCORT, KEYNOTE-181, ORIENT-2, RATIONALE-302) with a total of 1797 patients were included in the NMA. The NMA showed that both camrelizumab and tislelizumab received relatively high rankings for progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Compared with sintilimab, treatment with tislelizumab and camrelizumab gained 0.018 and 0.034 additional QALYs, resulting in incremental ICERs of $75,472.65/QALY and $175,681.9/QALY, respectively. Nivolumab and pembrolizumab produced lower QALYs and greater costs, suggesting that both were dominated in comparison to sintilimab. HRs and health state utilities were the most influential parameters in most univariate sensitivity analyses of paired comparisons. PSA results suggested that sintilimab had an 84.4% chance of being the most cost-effective treatment regimen at the WTP threshold of $38,223.34/QALY. In the scenario analysis, sintilimab would no longer be cost-effective, if the price of camrelizumab was assumed to decrease by 64.6% or the price of tislelizumab was assumed to decrease by 16.9%., Conclusions and Relevance: Among the five potential competing ICIs, sintilimab was likely to be the most cost-effective regimen as the second-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic ESCC in China., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has a poor prognosis, with limited second-line systemic therapy options, and represents an increasing disease burden in Japan. In the phase 3 RATIONALE-302 study, the anti-programmed cell death protein 1 antibody, tislelizumab, significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment for advanced/metastatic ESCC. Here, we report the Japanese patient subgroup results., Methods: Patients with advanced/metastatic ESCC, with disease progression during/after first-line systemic therapy were randomized 1:1 to open-label tislelizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks or investigator's choice of chemotherapy (paclitaxel/docetaxel). Efficacy and safety were assessed in all randomized Japanese patients., Results: The Japanese subgroup comprised 50 patients (n = 25 per arm). Tislelizumab improved OS versus chemotherapy (median: 9.8 vs. 7.6 months; HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.31, 1.12). Among patients with programmed death-ligand 1 score ≥ 10%, median OS was 12.5 months with tislelizumab (n = 10) versus 2.9 months with chemotherapy (n = 6) (HR 0.31; 95% CI 0.09, 1.03). Tislelizumab improved progression-free survival versus chemotherapy (median: 3.6 vs. 1.7 months, respectively; HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.27, 0.95). Objective response rate was greater with tislelizumab (32.0%) versus chemotherapy (20.0%), and responses were more durable (median duration of response: 8.8 vs. 2.6 months, respectively). Fewer patients experienced ≥ grade 3 treatment-related adverse events with tislelizumab (24.0%) versus chemotherapy (47.8%). Tislelizumab demonstrated an improvement in health-related quality of life versus chemotherapy., Conclusions: As second-line therapy for advanced/metastatic ESCC, tislelizumab improved OS versus chemotherapy, with a favorable safety profile, in the Japanese patient subgroup, consistent with the overall population., Clinical Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03430843., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The primary objective of this current study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of incorporating tislelizumab into the first-line treatment of metastatic or advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in comparison to placebo with chemotherapy., Method: We conducted a partitioned survival model with a time horizon of 10 years from a Chinese perspective. The direct medical costs were collected from the local setting in China. To enhance the credibility and robustness of the findings, sensitivity analyses were also conducted., Results: The inclusion of tislelizumab in conjunction with chemotherapy was shown to significantly enhance quality-adjusted life years (QALY) by 0.328 when compared to chemotherapy alone. This improvement comes at an additional cost of $9833.694. The incorporation of tislelizumab into the treatment regimen for advanced ESCC results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $29980.774/QALY gained, which falls below the WTP threshold of $37304.346/QALY in China. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that no parameters were found to be adjustable within a specific range without altering the overall outcomes of our study., Conclusion: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic ESCC is may be a cost-effective option compared to chemotherapy alone.

Background: The phase III RATIONALE-302 study evaluated tislelizumab, an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 antibody, as second-line (2L) treatment for advanced/metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This prespecified exploratory analysis investigated outcomes in patients from Europe and North America (Europe/North America subgroup)., Patients and Methods: Patients with tumor progression during/after first-line systemic treatment were randomized 1 : 1 to open-label tislelizumab or investigator's choice of chemotherapy (paclitaxel, docetaxel, or irinotecan)., Results: The Europe/North America subgroup comprised 108 patients (tislelizumab: n = 55; chemotherapy: n = 53). Overall survival (OS) was prolonged with tislelizumab versus chemotherapy (median: 11.2 versus 6.3 months), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.87]; HR was similar irrespective of programmed death-ligand 1 score [≥10%: 0.47 (95% CI 0.18-1.21); <10%: 0.55 (95% CI 0.30-1.01)]. Median progression-free survival was 2.3 versus 2.7 months with tislelizumab versus chemotherapy [HR: 0.97 (95% CI 0.64-1.47)]. Overall response rate was greater with tislelizumab (20.0%) versus chemotherapy (11.3%), with more durable response (median duration of response: 5.1 versus 2.1 months). Tislelizumab had a favorable safety profile versus chemotherapy, with fewer patients experiencing ≥grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (13.0% versus 51.0%). Those on tislelizumab experienced less deterioration in health-related quality of life, physical functioning, and/or disease- and treatment-related symptoms (i.e. fatigue, pain, and eating problems) as compared to those on chemotherapy, per the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and QLQ-OES18 scores., Conclusions: As a 2L therapy for advanced/metastatic ESCC, tislelizumab improved OS and had a favorable safety profile as compared to chemotherapy in European/North American ESCC patients in the randomized phase III RATIONALE-302 study., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The promising therapeutic outcomes of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) have been confirmed by several phase II clinical trials and have been widely demonstrated in clinical work. Theoretically, postoperative adjuvant immunotherapy may further improve the therapeutic effect, but there is still lack of evidence. The aim of this study was to analyse the safety and efficacy of perioperative immunotherapy (tislelizumab) in locally advanced resectable thoracic ESCC (PILOT trial)., Methods: Seventy-three eligible patients with pathologically confirmed thoracic ESCC of clinical T1b-3N1-3M0 or T3N0M0 stage were allocated to receive neoadjuvant immunotherapy (tislelizumab 200 mg d1, q3w × 2 cycles) plus chemotherapy (nad-paclitaxel 260 mg/m 2 d1 + carboplatin AUC = 5 d1, q3w × 2 cycles) treatment. Patients with pathologic complete response (pCR) after esophagectomy received adjuvant tislelizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks for up to one year), and patients with non-pCR were assigned adjuvant tislelizumab plus chemotherapy for two cycles and then maintenance tislelizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 15 cycles). The primary endpoint of this study is 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) in non-pCR patients. The secondary endpoints include pCR rate, major pathological response rate, 2-year DFS in pCR patients, R0 resection rate, adverse events, and overall survival., Discussion: This protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Shanghai Chest Hospital (IS23059). This is the first prospective clinical trial to investigate the safety and efficacy of perioperative immunotherapy for locally advanced resectable thoracic ESCC. We hypothesize that perioperative immunotherapy could be a promising therapeutic strategy that can provide better 2-year DFS in non-pCR patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT0605633., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The failure rate after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery is approximately 34.6%-48% for resectable esophageal carcinoma. Pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is an important factor in predicting lower recurrence and better survival. Whether the sequential addition of immunotherapy to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy will be beneficial to improving the pathologic complete response rate is unknown., Methods: Patients with pathologically confirmed thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and at clinical T1-2N1-3M0 or T3-4aN0-3M0 (stage II-IVA) according to the eighth edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer staging will be allocated to receive neoadjuvant radiotherapy (41.4 Gy with 23 fractions to planning target volume) with concurrent chemotherapy (albumin-bound paclitaxel, 100 mg/m 2 , once weekly for five weeks; carboplatin, area under the curve of 2 mg/mL/min, once weekly for five weeks) plus tislelizumab monotherapy sequentially (200 mg every three weeks for three cycles, beginning from the first to the 14th day after the end of radiotherapy). Then, subtotal esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy, including the whole mediastinum and abdomen, will be performed. The primary endpoint for this study is the pathologic complete response rate after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus tislelizumab., Discussion: The optimal timing of the combination of immunotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in esophageal carcinoma is not determined. The results of this phase II trial will be helpful to clarify the safety and efficacy of the sequential addition of tislelizumab after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced resectable esophageal carcinoma., Trial Registration: This study was approved on January 26, 2021 and retrospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04776590 ) on March 1, 2021., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Clinical benefit of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). remains unclear. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor tislelizumab combined with chemotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with resectable ESCC., Methods: Treatment-naïve patients were enrolled and eligible patients received 3 cycles of neoadjuvant therapy with tislelizumab, carboplatin, and nab-paclitaxel. The primary endpoint was surgery patients major pathological response (MPR). Subgroup analysis was stratified by tumor downstaging, circumferential resection margin (CRM), PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, and tumor mutation burden (TMB). Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs) and postoperative complications., Results: Between September 2020 and March 2021, 45 patients were enrolled. Thirty-six (80.0%) of 45 patients underwent surgery, and 29 (80.5%) underwent successful R0 resection. MPR and pathological complete response (pCR) for surgery patients were 72.0% and 50.0%, respectively. Intention to treatment (ITT) patients MPR and PCR were 57.5% and 40%. Downgrading occurred in 75% of 36 patients. MPR and pCR were identified to be associated with tumor downstaging and CRM but not PD-L1 expression or TMB. TPS levels in MPR and pCR group were significantly higher than that in Non-MPR and Non-pCR group, respectively. Treatment-related AEs of grade 3-4 and immune-related AEs occurred in 42.2% and 22.2% of 45 patients, respectively, and postoperative complications occurred in 77.8% of 36 patients. No treatment-related surgical delay or death occurred. No associations between gene mutation and pathological efficacy were observed., Conclusions: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy demonstrates promising antitumor activity for resectable ESCC with high rates of MPR, pCR, and R0 resection, as well as acceptable tolerability., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains a challenging malignant tumor with poor prognosis and limited treatment methods worldwide, and most patients are at a locally advanced stage at diagnosis. High recurrence and metastasis rates remain the main factors leading to the failure of the current standard treatment of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery for resectable locally advanced ESCC. Improving the pathological complete response (pCR) rate may significantly benefit the survival of patients with resectable locally advanced ESCC after neoadjuvant therapy., Methods: Tislelizumab plus sequential neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to non-clinical complete response (cCR) patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced ESCC. The patients then received surgery and adjuvant therapy according to the postoperative pathological results. Eighty patients with locally advanced ESCC were recruited for the study. The primary outcomes of the pCR rate and the incidence of adverse events will be analyzed completely within 24 months, and the secondary endpoints will include cCR rate, major pathological response rate, objective response rate, R0 resection rate, event-free survival, and overall survival., Discussion: This study explored the safety and efficacy of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy sequential neoadjuvant therapy for non-cCR patients and provided a total neoadjuvant therapy model that can benefit patients with locally advanced ESCC., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials. gov NCT05189730. Registered: November 26, 2021, https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000BBD5&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0004UG3&ts=47&cx=e0cm59., Competing Interests: Author HC was employed by BeiGene (Beijing) Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 He, Wang, Wu, Wan, Li, Han, Li, Leng, Du, Chen, Wang and Peng.)

Definitive chemoradiotherapy is the standard of care for inoperable locoregionally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Immune checkpoint inhibitors such as anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies have led to a paradigm shift in advanced, metastatic ESCC treatment; however, the effect of incorporating checkpoint inhibitors in the definitive management of ESCC is unclear. Tislelizumab is an anti-PD-1 antibody specifically engineered to minimize FcɣR binding on macrophages to abrogate antibody-dependent phagocytosis, a mechanism of T-cell clearance and potential resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. The RATIONALE 311 study described here (BGB-A317-311; NCT03957590) is a registrational multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, Phase III clinical trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab combined with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with inoperable localized ESCC.

Abstract Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated superior clinical efficacy in prolonging overall survival (OS) as the second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and were recommended by the guidelines. However, it remains uncertain which ICI is the most cost-effective. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of ICIs as the second-line treatment for ESCC based on the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Methods A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to obtain the Hazard ratios (HRs) for indirect comparisons. A three-state Markov model with a 10-year time horizon was conducted to assess the cost-effectiveness. The state transition probabilities were calculated with Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves data from clinical trial and HRs from the NMA. Utilities and costs were derived from local charges or previously published studies. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to examine model robustness. The results were assessed based on the total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results Five clinical trials (ATTRACTION-3, ESCORT, KEYNOTE-181, ORIENT-2, RATIONALE-302) with a total of 1797 patients were included in the NMA. The NMA showed that both camrelizumab and tislelizumab received relatively high rankings for progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Compared with sintilimab, treatment with tislelizumab and camrelizumab gained 0.018 and 0.034 additional QALYs, resulting in incremental ICERs of $75,472.65/QALY and $175,681.9/QALY, respectively. Nivolumab and pembrolizumab produced lower QALYs and greater costs, suggesting that both were dominated in comparison to sintilimab. HRs and health state utilities were the most influential parameters in most univariate sensitivity analyses of paired comparisons. PSA results suggested that sintilimab had an 84.4% chance of being the most cost-effective treatment regimen at the WTP threshold of $38,223.34/QALY. In the scenario analysis, sintilimab would no longer be cost-effective, if the price of camrelizumab was assumed to decrease by 64.6% or the price of tislelizumab was assumed to decrease by 16.9%. Conclusions and relevance Among the five potential competing ICIs, sintilimab was likely to be the most cost-effective regimen as the second-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic ESCC in China.

Background: Tislelizumab, a humanized IgG4 anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody has been approved in China and Europe. According to the published clinical research, tislelizumab shows satisfactory safety profile. No severe hepatotoxicity or acute kidney injury were reported. Case presentation: We presented a case study of a 74-year-old man who developed acute kidney injury (grade 3) and acute liver injury (grade 4) after being administered tislelizumab for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. We reviewed the patient's history, physical examination, and laboratory findings and provided comprehensive differentials of the possible causes of the toxicities. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity were confirmed clinically. We also discussed the management of toxicities associated with ICIs and the need for a multidisciplinary approach to care. Conclusions: The case highlights the importance of close monitoring and prompt management of toxicities associated with ICIs and the need for further research to better understand the risk factors for these toxicities and to identify effective treatments for them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chongchong Zhou,1,2,&ast; Jingxuan Wei,1,&ast; Kai Xu,1 Yingtao Lin,3,4 Lingli Zhang,1 Xin Li1,4,5 1Department of Pharmaceutical Regulatory Science and Pharmacoeconomics, School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Research Management, Nanjing Stomatological Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, People’s Republic of China; 3Department of Drug Clinical Trial Institution, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, People’s Republic of China; 4Center for Global Health, School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People’s Republic of China; 5Department of Health Policy, School of Health Policy and Management, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, People’s Republic of China&ast;These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Xin Li; Lingli Zhang, School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, No. 101 Longmian Avenue, Jiangning District, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 211166, People’s Republic of China, Email xinli@njmu.edu.cn; zhanglingli@njmu.edu.cnBackground: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy improved overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone, while maintaining an acceptable level of safety. But it’s still unclear which strategy is the most cost-effective. The objective of the study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) versus chemotherapy alone.Methods: A partitioned survival model with three states was constructed based on the RATIONALE-306 trial. The model’s time horizon was ten years, and its cycle was three weeks. Only direct medical costs were considered from the healthcare perspective in China. Calculations were performed on total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). One-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to determine the uncertainty regarding model parameters.Results: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy provided 1.35 QALYs for &dollar;26,450.77, while chemotherapy alone provided 0.89 QALY for &dollar;16,687.15. Compared to chemotherapy alone, tislelizumab had an ICER of &dollar;21,062.09/QALY. At the threshold of three times the Chinese GDP per capita (&dollar;38,253/QALY), the PSA indicated that tislelizumab had a 96.4% likelihood of being designated cost-effective. At the threshold of 1.5 times the Chinese GDP per capita (&dollar;19,126.5/QALY), the PSA indicated that tislelizumab had a probability of 48.7% of being designated cost-effective.Conclusion: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as the first treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC may be a cost-effective option compared to chemotherapy alone at 3 times Chinese GDP per capita.Keywords: esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, cost-effectiveness, partitioned survival model, tislelizumab

Background and purpose: The latest RATIONALE-302 trial (NCT03430843) showed that tislelizumab therapy significantly improved overall survival benefits for patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) compared with traditional chemotherapy. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab versus chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic ESCC in China.Methods: A partitioned survival model was developed to predict patients’ lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the Chinese healthcare payers’ perspective. We extracted efficacy and safety data from the RATIONALE-302 trial and the local cost and resource use data from online databases and published studies. One-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to explore model uncertainty.Results: Compared with chemotherapy, tislelizumab generated a higher cost (US$ 10211.78 vs. US$ 7294.72) but yielded more QALY (0.78 vs. 0.51 QALYs). The ICER for tislelizumab was US$11073.85 per QALY gained. The PSA results indicated that the probability of tislelizumab being economical was 76% under a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 1.5 times per capita GDP ($17915) in China.Conclusion: Tislelizumab could be a promising cost-effective strategy as the second-line treatment for patients with ESCC compared with chemotherapy in the Chinese setting.

Background: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains a challenging malignant tumor with poor prognosis and limited treatment methods worldwide, and most patients are at a locally advanced stage at diagnosis. High recurrence and metastasis rates remain the main factors leading to the failure of the current standard treatment of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery for resectable locally advanced ESCC. Improving the pathological complete response (pCR) rate may significantly benefit the survival of patients with resectable locally advanced ESCC after neoadjuvant therapy. Methods: Tislelizumab plus sequential neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to non-clinical complete response (cCR) patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced ESCC. The patients then received surgery and adjuvant therapy according to the postoperative pathological results. Eighty patients with locally advanced ESCC were recruited for the study. The primary outcomes of the pCR rate and the incidence of adverse events will be analyzed completely within 24 months, and the secondary endpoints will include cCR rate, major pathological response rate, objective response rate, R0 resection rate, event-free survival, and overall survival. Discussion: This study explored the safety and efficacy of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy sequential neoadjuvant therapy for non-cCR patients and provided a total neoadjuvant therapy model that can benefit patients with locally advanced ESCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-programmed cell death 1 immuno-monotherapy has become the second-line standard treatment for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after the failure of first-line chemotherapy. However, new biomarkers are still needed to identify patients at risk of tumor progression and to select patients with advanced ESCC who are likely to benefit from immunotherapy. A total of 12 patients with advanced ESCC treated with tislelizumab were prospectively enrolled and endoscopic biopsy samples were collected. Plasma was obtained prior to and after every 2-3 treatment cycles with tislelizumab and when disease progression occurred. Targeted sequencing of 425 genes from plasma cell-free DNA, DNA from leukocytes and fixed esophageal tumor biopsies was performed. The patients underwent imaging analyses every 6-8 weeks until disease progression. The association between status of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) or changes in ctDNA following tislelizumab immunotherapy and response, tumor progression and survival was determined. All patients had evaluable next-generation sequencing results at the time of analysis. The results showed that patients with ESCC with liver metastasis had a significantly shorter median progression-free survival (mPFS: 1.4 vs. 11.7 months; P=0.037). TSC complex subunit 2 [11.7 months vs. not reached (NR); P=0.004] and zinc finger protein 217 (11.7 months vs. NR; P=0.022) gene mutations were the independent and negative prognostic factors for median overall survival (OS), respectively. Of note, ctDNA dynamic changes expressed as ∆ mutant molecules per milliliter of plasma (∆MMPM; MMPM detected at the first monitoring time-point after the first infusion of tislelizumab as baseline MMPM) predicted progression-free survival (PFS) and OS more accurately compared to the ctDNA change of an individual gene. ∆MMPM <20% was an independent predictor of PFS (2.8 vs. 14.6 months; P=0.029), although there was no significant difference for OS (16.7 vs. 17.6 months; P=0.830). In conclusion, changes in ctDNA levels were associated with anti-tumor effects, progression and disease-specific survival. ctDNA sequencing is promising for predicting response and progression after tislelizumab immunotherapy as second-line monotherapy for advanced ESCC [the present study was part of the RATIONALE-302 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier no. NCT03430843; 29.01.2018)]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]