Abstract 404P
Background
Patients with advanced lung cancer are considered to have a poor prognosis, and recent studies have shown that immunotherapy appears to be associated with improved prognosis and prolonged survival significantly compared with chemotherapy. However, immunotherapy may refer to a comparatively high medical cost and bring severe financial toxicity to patients. In the treatment course of patients with advanced lung cancer, much attention was paid to the safety and efficacy of medications, rather than financial toxicity, which may affect the prognosis and survival indeed. In that case, it is necessary to weigh the profit and the financial toxicity led by immunotherapy.
Methods
We performed a systematic search in Medline on the cost-effectiveness of immunotherapy in patients with advanced lung cancer, and 16 studies were included, consisting of 6 countries, We systematically reviewed the incremental cost for improved quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in patients treated with immunotherapy with respect to different countries and different tumor proportion score (TPS) of programmed death receptor-1 ligand (PD-L1).
Results
We found that the willingness to pay (WTP) was not significantly associated with ICER among three western countries (P=0.354). Patients with TPS ≥50%, ≥20%, or ≥1% showed no significant differences in elevated QALYs (P=0.148) and ICER (P=0.263). The elevated QALYs (P=0.024) and ICER of Pembrolizumab were significantly higher than that of Atezolizumab (P=0.045), while there was no significant difference in the cost of elevated QALY between Pembrolizumab and Atezolizumab (P=0.747).
Conclusions
Patients with advanced lung cancer would get profit in the treatment of immunotherapy from different countries, while Pembrolizumab would be associated with a higher benefit and less financial toxicity when taking cost-effectiveness analysis into account. Thus, patients would get more in the immunotherapy when financial toxicity was taken into consideration, and it is necessary to integrate financial toxicity in the clinical decision.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
324P - COVID era: Perception of oncologists from a developing nation
Presenter: Rakesh Roy
Session: e-Poster Display Session
325P - Clinical characteristics and outcomes of cancer patients with COVID-19 infection: A retrospective study in a single center in the Philippines
Presenter: Frances Victoria Que
Session: e-Poster Display Session
326P - Management of diffuse large B cell lymphomas in the COVID-19 era
Presenter: David Ng
Session: e-Poster Display Session
327P - COVID-19 in patients with oncohematologic diseases in Kazakhstan
Presenter: Zaure Dushimova
Session: e-Poster Display Session
328P - Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on 30 days colorectal cancer patients mortality undergoing emergency operation
Presenter: Ida Bagus Budhi
Session: e-Poster Display Session
329P - Radiotherapy palliative and COVID-19: Experience of radiotherapy oncology department of Cancer Center Tlemcen, Algeria
Presenter: Asma Mous
Session: e-Poster Display Session
330P - COVID and cancer: Choosing between hammer and anvil
Presenter: Ullas Batra
Session: e-Poster Display Session
331P - The clock stopped with COVID-19 but continued ticking for cancer patients
Presenter: Sasi Shanmugam Senga
Session: e-Poster Display Session
336P - Efficacy of methylcobalamin administered intravenously for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN): A prospective crossover study
Presenter: Jun Chen
Session: e-Poster Display Session
337P - A prospective study about the quality of life and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy
Presenter: Wala Ben Kridis
Session: e-Poster Display Session