Navigation überspringen
Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg
Status: Bibliographieeintrag

Verfügbarkeit
Standort: ---
Exemplare: ---
heiBIB
 Online-Ressource
Verfasst von:Verma, Vivek [VerfasserIn]   i
 Sprave, Tetyana [VerfasserIn]   i
 Haque, Waqar [VerfasserIn]   i
 Simone, Charles B. [VerfasserIn]   i
 Chang, Joe Y. [VerfasserIn]   i
 Welsh, James W. [VerfasserIn]   i
 Thomas, Charles R. [VerfasserIn]   i
Titel:A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness studies of immune checkpoint inhibitors
Verf.angabe:Vivek Verma, Tanja Sprave, Waqar Haque, Charles B. Simone II, Joe Y. Chang, James W. Welsh and Charles R. Thomas Jr
E-Jahr:2018
Jahr:2018 Nov 23
Umfang:15 S.
Fussnoten:Gesehen am 14.04.2020
Titel Quelle:Enthalten in: Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
Ort Quelle:London : BioMed Central, 2013
Jahr Quelle:2018
Band/Heft Quelle:6(2018,1) Artikel-Nummer 128, 15 Seiten
ISSN Quelle:2051-1426
Abstract:Background - Escalating healthcare costs are necessitating the practice of value-based oncology. It is crucial to critically evaluate the economic impact of influential but expensive therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). To date, no systematic assessment of the cost-effectiveness (CE) of ICIs has been performed. - - Methods - PRISMA-guided systematic searches of the PubMed database were conducted. Studies of head/neck (n = 3), lung (n = 5), genitourinary (n = 4), and melanoma (n = 8) malignancies treated with ICIs were evaluated. The reference willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was $100,000/QALY. - - Results - Nivolumab was not cost-effective over chemotherapy for recurrent/metastatic head/neck cancers (HNCs). For non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), nivolumab was not cost-effective for a general cohort, but increased PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in CE. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for both previously treated and newly-diagnosed metastatic NSCLC. For genitourinary cancers (GUCs, renal cell and bladder cancers), nivolumab and pembrolizumab were not cost-effective options. Regarding metastatic/unresected melanoma, ipilimumab monotherapy is less cost-effective than nivolumab, nivolumab/ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab. The addition of ipilimumab to nivolumab monotherapy was not adequately cost-effective. Pembrolizumab or nivolumab monotherapy offered comparable CE profiles. - - Conclusions - With limited data and from the reference WTP, nivolumab was not cost-effective for HNCs. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for NSCLC; although not the case for nivolumab, applying PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in adequate CE. Most data for nivolumab and pembrolizumab in GUCs did not point towards adequate CE. Contrary to ipilimumab, either nivolumab or pembrolizumab is cost-effective for melanoma. Despite these conclusions, it cannot be overstated that careful patient selection is critical for CE. Future publication of CE investigations and clinical trials (along with longer follow-up of existing data) could substantially alter conclusions from this analysis.
DOI:doi:10.1186/s40425-018-0442-7
URL:Bitte beachten Sie: Dies ist ein Bibliographieeintrag. Ein Volltextzugriff für Mitglieder der Universität besteht hier nur, falls für die entsprechende Zeitschrift/den entsprechenden Sammelband ein Abonnement besteht oder es sich um einen OpenAccess-Titel handelt.

Volltext ; Verlag: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40425-018-0442-7
 Volltext: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6251215/
 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40425-018-0442-7
Datenträger:Online-Ressource
Sprache:eng
K10plus-PPN:1694496740
Verknüpfungen:→ Zeitschrift

Permanenter Link auf diesen Titel (bookmarkfähig):  https://katalog.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/titel/68564004   QR-Code
zum Seitenanfang