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
434P - Pan-Canadian evidence-based, consensus-driven cancer treatment protocols/information for use at the point of care by medical oncologists? Is there a need?
Presenter: Kiran Virik
Session: e-Poster Display Session
435P - Hypnotics and risk of cancer: A meta-analysis of observational studies
Presenter: Tzu Rong Peng
Session: e-Poster Display Session
436P - Clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes of adolescent and young adult (AYA) melanoma: Results from an Asian perspective
Presenter: Wei Lin Goh
Session: e-Poster Display Session
437P - Long-term efficacy and toxicity outcome of adjuvant external beam radiotherapy for medullary thyroid cancer: A single institution cohort study
Presenter: Ka Man Cheung
Session: e-Poster Display Session
438P - Real-world data of relapse after adjuvant treatment (Tx) in high-risk melanoma
Presenter: Carolina Ortiz Velez
Session: e-Poster Display Session
439P - Immunohistochemical analysis of p53 and Ki-67 in glioblastoma (GBM) and their correlations with patient survival
Presenter: Paulo Luz
Session: e-Poster Display Session
440P - Blinded independent central review of oncology trials: The monitoring of readers' performance
Presenter: Hubert Beaumont
Session: e-Poster Display Session
441P - Influence of radiation therapy of patients with somatotropic pituitary adenomas depending on the age of patients
Presenter: Saodat Issaeva
Session: e-Poster Display Session
442P - Results from the registrational phase I/II ARROW trial of pralsetinib (BLU-667) in patients (pts) with advanced RET mutation-positive medullary thyroid cancer (RET+ MTC)
Presenter: Bhumsuk Keam
Session: e-Poster Display Session