Cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors for microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer

Cancer. 2019 Jan 15;125(2):278-289. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31795. Epub 2018 Oct 21.

Abstract

Background: Patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) show a significant response to checkpoint inhibitor therapies, but the economic impact of these therapies is unknown. A decision analytic model was used to explore the effectiveness and cost burden of MSI-H/dMMR mCRC treatment.

Methods: The treatment of hypothetical patients with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC was simulated in 2 treatment scenarios: a third-line treatment and an exploratory first-line treatment. The treatments compared were nivolumab, ipilimumab and nivolumab, trifluridine and tipiracil (third-line treatment), and mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (first-line treatment). Disease progression, drug toxicity, and survival rates were based on the CheckMate 142, study of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapies (RECOURSE), and Cancer and Leukemia Group B/Southwest Oncology Group 80405 trials. The analyzed outcomes included survival (life-years), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results: Ipilimumab with nivolumab was the most effective strategy (10.69 life-years and 9.25 QALYs for the third line; 10.69 life-years and 9.44 QALYs for the first line) in comparison with nivolumab (8.21 life-years and 6.76 QALYs for the third line; 8.21 life-years and 7.00 QALYs for the first line), trifluridine and tipiracil (0.74 life-years and 0.07 QALYs), and mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (2.72 life-years and 1.63 QALYs). However, neither checkpoint inhibitor therapy was cost-effective in comparison with trifluridine and tipiracil (nivolumab ICER, $153,000; ipilimumab and nivolumab ICER, $162,700) or mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (nivolumab ICER, $150,700; ipilimumab and nivolumab ICER, $158,700).

Conclusions: This modeling analysis found that both single and dual checkpoint blockade could be significantly more effective for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC than chemotherapy, but they were not cost-effective, largely because of drug costs. Decreases in drug pricing and/or the duration of maintenance nivolumab could make ipilimumab and nivolumab cost-effective. Prospective clinical trials should be performed to explore the optimal duration of maintenance nivolumab.

Keywords: colorectal neoplasms; cost-benefit analysis; immunotherapy; ipilimumab; nivolumab.

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological / economics*
  • Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological / therapeutic use*
  • Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / economics
  • Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / therapeutic use
  • Colorectal Neoplasms / drug therapy*
  • Colorectal Neoplasms / economics
  • Colorectal Neoplasms / genetics
  • Colorectal Neoplasms / pathology
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • DNA Mismatch Repair
  • Drug Costs
  • Female
  • Fluorouracil / economics
  • Fluorouracil / therapeutic use
  • Humans
  • Ipilimumab / administration & dosage
  • Ipilimumab / economics
  • Leucovorin / economics
  • Leucovorin / therapeutic use
  • Male
  • Microsatellite Instability
  • Middle Aged
  • Nivolumab / administration & dosage
  • Nivolumab / economics
  • Organoplatinum Compounds / economics
  • Organoplatinum Compounds / therapeutic use
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years

Substances

  • Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological
  • Ipilimumab
  • Organoplatinum Compounds
  • Nivolumab
  • Leucovorin
  • Fluorouracil

Supplementary concepts

  • Folfox protocol