Economic Evaluation of Nivolumab Versus Docetaxel for the Treatment of Advanced Squamous and Non-squamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer After Prior Chemotherapy in China.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic value of nivolumab versus docetaxel for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treatment after platinum-based chemotherapy in adults without epidermal growth factor receptor/anaplastic lymphoma kinase aberrations in China. METHODS: Partitioned survival models evaluated lifetime costs and benefits of nivolumab versus docetaxel by squamous and non-squamous histologies from a Chinese healthcare payer perspective. Progression-free disease, progressed disease, and death health states were considered over a 20-year time horizon. Clinical data were derived from the CheckMate pivotal Phase III trials (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01642004, NCT01673867, NCT02613507); patient-level survival data were extrapolated using parametric functions. China-specific health state utilities, healthcare resource utilisation, and unit costs were applied. Sensitivity analyses explored uncertainty. RESULTS: Nivolumab resulted in extended survival (1.489 and 1.228 life-years [1.226 and 0.995 discounted]) and quality-adjusted survival benefits (1.034 and 0.833 quality-adjusted life-years) at additional costs of ¥214,353 (US$31,829) and ¥158,993 (US$23,608) versus docetaxel in squamous and non-squamous aNSCLC, respectively. Nivolumab was associated with higher acquisition costs, lower subsequent treatment costs, and lower adverse event management costs than docetaxel in both histologies. Drug acquisition costs, discount rate for outcomes, and average body weight were key model drivers. Stochastic results aligned with the deterministic results. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab yielded survival and quality-adjusted survival benefits at incremental cost versus docetaxel in aNSCLC. As a traditional healthcare payer perspective was applied, the true economic benefit of nivolumab may be underestimated as not all treatment benefits and costs of relevance to society were considered.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nivolumab Compared with Ipilimumab for the Treatment of BRAF Wild-Type Advanced Melanoma in Australia.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab versus ipilimumab for the treatment of previously untreated patients with BRAF-advanced melanoma (BRAF-AM) from an Australian health system perspective. METHODS: A state-transition Markov model was constructed to simulate the progress of Australian patients with BRAF-AM. The model had a 10-year time horizon with outcomes discounted at 5% annually. For the nivolumab group, risks of progression and death were based on those observed in the nivolumab arm of a phase III trial (nivolumab vs. dacarbazine). Progression-free survival and overall survival were extrapolated using parametric survival modeling with a log-logistic distribution. In the absence of head-to-head evidence, overall survival and progression-free survival for ipilimumab were estimated on the basis of an indirect comparison using published data. Costs of managing AM were estimated from a survey of Australian clinicians. The cost of ipilimumab was based on the reimbursement price in Australia. The cost of nivolumab was based on expected reimbursement prices in Australia. Quality-of-life data were obtained within the trial using the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire. RESULTS: Compared with ipilimumab, nivolumab therapy over 10 years was estimated to yield 1.58 life-years and 1.30 quality-adjusted life-years per person, at a (discounted) net cost of US $39,039 per person. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for nivolumab compared with ipilimumab were US $25,101 per year of life saved and $30,475 per quality-adjusted life-year saved. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab is a cost-effective means of preventing downstream mortality and morbidity in patients with AM compared with ipilimumab in the Australian setting.

Acidification in the Adirondacks: defining the biota in trophic levels of 30 chemically diverse acid-impacted lakes.

The Adirondack Mountains in New York State have a varied surficial geology and chemically diverse surface waters that are among the most impacted by acid deposition in the U.S. No single Adirondack investigation has been comprehensive in defining the effects of acidification on species diversity, from bacteria through fish, essential for understanding the full impact of acidification on biota. Baseline midsummer chemistry and community composition are presented for a group of chemically diverse Adirondack lakes. Species richness of all trophic levels except bacteria is significantly correlated with lake acid-base chemistry. The loss of taxa observed per unit pH was similar: bacterial genera (2.50), bacterial classes (1.43), phytoplankton (3.97), rotifers (3.56), crustaceans (1.75), macrophytes (3.96), and fish (3.72). Specific pH criteria were applied to the communities to define and identify acid-tolerant (pH<5.0), acid-resistant (pH 5.0-5.6), and acid-sensitive (pH>5.6) species which could serve as indicators. Acid-tolerant and acid-sensitive categories are at end-points along the pH scale, significantly different at P<0.05; the acid-resistant category is the range of pH between these end-points, where community changes continually occur as the ecosystem moves in one direction or another. The biota acid tolerance classification (batc) system described herein provides a clear distinction between the taxonomic groups identified in these subcategories and can be used to evaluate the impact of acid deposition on different trophic levels of biological communities.