Cost Effectiveness and Budget Impact of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Versus Platinum Plus Pemetrexed (with and Without Bevacizumab) in Patients with Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural mesotheliomas (MPMs) are aggressive and often unresectable. In the past, chemotherapy was the standard for palliative treatment. However, immunotherapy with nivolumab+ipilimumab has recently received marketing approval. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of nivolumab+ipilimumab versus pemetrexed+platinum (with/without bevacizumab) for Swiss patients with unresectable MPM, overall and by histological subtype. METHODS: We developed a three-state Markov cohort model with a cycle length of 1 month, a 30-year time horizon, and a discount rate of 3% per year for costs and benefits. The model included the updated survival and treatment-dependent utility results from the Checkmate-743 and MAPS registration trials. A Swiss statutory health insurance perspective was considered with unit costs for 2022 from publicly available and real-world sources. We assumed a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of CHF100,000/QALY. Model robustness was explored in sensitivity and scenario analyses. RESULTS: Compared with chemotherapy, nivolumab+ipilimumab incurred additional costs of CHF109,115 and 0.57 additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CHF192,585/QALY (i.e. USD201,829/QALY) gained. Relative to their 2022 list price, nivolumab+ipilimumab may be cost effective if priced at 48% across all histologies. Assuming cisplatin-based instead of carboplatin-based chemotherapy reduced the ICER to CHF158,911/QALY (i.e. USD166,539/QALY). For the non-epithelioid subtype, nivolumab+ipilimumab was cost effective compared with chemotherapy (ICER of CHF97,894/QALY, i.e. USD102,593/QALY). Chemotherapy+bevacizumab was often a dominated strategy or would require a bevacizumab cost reduction to 28%. CONCLUSIONS: Our model projected nivolumab+ipilimumab to be cost effective for the non-epithelioid subtype but not for all histologies. Substantial discounts for nivolumab+ipilimumab would be necessary to achieve cost effectiveness for all histologies.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with metastatic, non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer and high PD-L1 expression in Switzerland.

INTRODUCTION: Pembrolizumab monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy are two new treatment options for patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and high (≥ 50%) programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis for Switzerland comparing these two options but also pembrolizumab to chemotherapy. METHODS: We constructed a 3-state Markov model with a time horizon of 10 years. Parametric functions were fitted to Kaplan-Meier overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) using 2-year follow-up data from the KN-024 and KN-189 registration trials. We included estimated costs for further treatment lines and costs for best supportive care. Costs were assessed from the Swiss healthcare payer perspective. We used published utility values. RESULTS: Combination therapy resulted in an expected gain of 0.17 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient and incremental costs of Swiss Francs (CHF) 81,085 as compared to pembrolizumab. These estimates led to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CHF 475,299/QALY. Pembrolizumab in comparison to chemotherapy was estimated to generate mean incremental QALYs of 0.83 and incremental costs of CHF 56,585, resulting in an ICER of CHF 68,580/QALY. Results were most sensitive to changes in costs of 1L pembrolizumab and combination therapy, together with changes in PFS. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, we estimated combination therapy was cost-effective in 4.9% of the simulations and pembrolizumab monotherapy in 82.9%, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of CHF 100,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab is likely to be cost-effective from the Swiss healthcare payer perspective, whereas pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy is not.

Nivolumab for recurrent cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: three cases.

Programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) is frequently expressed in cutaneous squamous cell cancer (CSCC) and preliminary data from an ongoing clinical trial suggest that programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitors may be useful to treat patients with metastatic non-melanoma skin cancer. To report a series of three patients with advanced CSCC treated with nivolumab, showing that commercially available PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors may be useful in non-melanoma skin cancer patients without access to a clinical trial. All patients had previous chemotherapy. All cancers were PD-1 ligand (PD-L1)-positive based on immunohistochemistry. Patients consented to off-label therapy with nivolumab, which is commercially available in Switzerland. Two patients had a partial tumour response, and have been receiving therapy for more than 12 months. One patient had stable disease after three months, and therapy is also ongoing. So far, no severe adverse effects have occurred. Our cases confirm previous reports demonstrating a clinical effect and tolerability of PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors for heavily pre-treated patients with metastatic CSCC. Commercially available PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors may be useful in these patients who should be considered for PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor therapy, preferentially within clinical trials.

ELISA kit for peanut protein determination: collaborative study.

A collaborative study in 10 laboratories was performed to validate an ELISA method developed for the quantitative determination of peanut protein in foods. The ELISA kit used for this study is based on rabbit polyclonal antibody. This kit does not produce any false-positive results or cross-reactivity with a broad range of peanut-free food matrixes. All participants obtained the peanut ELISA kit with standard operational procedures, a list of samples, the samples, and a protocol for recording test results. The study included 15 food samples. Three food matrix samples of zero peanut content showed peanut protein content lower than the first standard (0.10 mg/kg). Three samples with peanut declared as an ingredient revealed peanut protein content outside the calibration curve (absorbance was above the highest standard) in all laboratories, and three samples had the peanut content reported either above the highest standard or within the calibration curve, depending on the laboratory. Six samples with peanut declared as an ingredient gave the peanut protein content within the calibration curve. Only these six samples, together with a positive control sample (CS2), were used for statistical evaluation. The statistical tests (Cochran, Grubbs, and Mandel) and analysis of variance were used for the evaluation of the collaborative study results. Repeatability and reproducibility limits, as well as an LOQ (LOQcollaborative 0.22 mg peanut proteins/kg) and an LOD (LODcollaborative 0.07 mg peanut proteinslkg) for the kit were calculated.