ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients experiencing relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (r/r DLBCL) have limited treatment options and poor prognosis. Tisagenlecleucel (TIS) has shown improved clinical outcomes, but at a high upfront cost. Singapore has a multi-payer healthcare system where private insurance is one of the major payers. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of TIS against salvage chemotherapy regimen (SCR) for treating r/r DLBCL patients who have failed ≥2 lines of systemic therapy from Singapore's private insurance payer's perspective. METHODS: Over a life-time horizon, a partitioned survival model with three health-states was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TIS vs. SCR with or without hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Efficacy inputs for TIS and SCR were based on 43 months of observation data from pooled JULIET and UPenn trials, and CORAL extension studies respectively. Direct costs for pre-treatment, treatment, adverse events, follow-up, subsequent-HSCT, relapse, and terminal care were included. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated as the total incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Additionally, the financial implication of introducing TIS in Singapore from a private payer's perspective was analyzed, comparing the current treatment pathway (without TIS) with a future scenario (with TIS) over 5 years. RESULTS: Compared with SCR, TIS was the dominant option, with cost savings of S$8,477 alongside an additional gain of 2.78 QALYs in privately insured patients who shifted from private to public hospitals for TIS treatment. Scenario analyses for patients starting in public hospitals show ICERs of S$99,623 (no subsidy) and S$133,261 (50% subsidy for SCR treatment, no subsidy for TIS), supporting the base case. The projected annual budget impact ranges from S$850,000 to S$3.4 million during the first 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: TIS for treating r/r DLBCL patients who have failed ≥2 lines of systemic therapies, is likely to be cost effective with limited budget impact.
