Next Article in Journal
Association between Known Risk Factors and Colorectal Cancer Risk in Indigenous People Participating in the Ontario Familial Colon Cancer Registry
Previous Article in Journal
Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Wait Times in Specialized Diagnostic Units Compared with Usual Care: A Population-Based Study
 
 
Current Oncology is published by MDPI from Volume 28 Issue 1 (2021). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Multimed Inc..
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Cost–Utility Analysis of Atezolizumab in the Second-Line Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Bladder Cancer

1
Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
2
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluative Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
3
Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaboration, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
4
ICES, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
5
Public Health Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada
6
Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, ON, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Curr. Oncol. 2020, 27(4), 386-394; https://doi.org/10.3747/co.27.5459
Submission received: 6 May 2020 / Revised: 2 June 2020 / Accepted: 8 July 2020 / Published: 1 August 2020

Abstract

Background: Despite initial promising results, the IMvigor211 clinical trial failed to demonstrate an overall survival (OS) benefit for atezolizumab compared with chemotherapy as second-line treatment for metastatic bladder cancer (mBC). However, given lessened adverse events (AES) and preserved quality of life (QOL) with atezolizumab, there might still be investment value. To evaluate that potential value, we conducted a cost–utility analysis (CUA) of atezolizumab compared with chemotherapy from the perspective of the Canadian health care payer. Methods: A partitioned survival model was used to evaluate atezolizumab compared with chemotherapy over a lifetime horizon (5 years). The base-case analysis was conducted for the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, with additional scenario analyses for subgroups by IMvigor-defined PD-L1 status. Health outcomes were evaluated through life–year gains and quality-adjusted life–years (QALYS). Cost estimates in 2018 Canadian dollars for systemic treatment, AES, and end-of-life care were incorporated. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to compare treatment strategies. Parameter and model uncertainty were assessed through sensitivity and scenario analyses. Per Canadian guidelines, cost and effectiveness were discounted at 1.5%. Results: For the ITT population, the expected qalys for atezolizumab and chemotherapy were 0.75 and 0.56, with expected costs of $90,290 and $8,466 respectively. The resultant ICER for atezolizumab compared with chemotherapy was $430,652 per QALY. Scenario analysis of patients with PD-L1 expression levels of 5% or greater led to a lower ICER ($334,387 per QALY). Scenario analysis of observed compared with expected benefits demonstrated a higher icer, with a shorter time horizon ($928,950 per QALY). Conclusions: Despite lessened aes and preserved QOL, atezolizumab is not considered cost-effective for the second-line treatment of mbc.
Keywords: cost-utility analyses; health technology assessments; atezolizumab; immunotherapy; metastatic bladder cancer cost-utility analyses; health technology assessments; atezolizumab; immunotherapy; metastatic bladder cancer

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Parmar, A.; Richardson, M.; Coyte, P.C.; Cheng, S.; Sander, B.; Chan, K.K.W. A Cost–Utility Analysis of Atezolizumab in the Second-Line Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Bladder Cancer. Curr. Oncol. 2020, 27, 386-394. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.27.5459

AMA Style

Parmar A, Richardson M, Coyte PC, Cheng S, Sander B, Chan KKW. A Cost–Utility Analysis of Atezolizumab in the Second-Line Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Bladder Cancer. Current Oncology. 2020; 27(4):386-394. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.27.5459

Chicago/Turabian Style

Parmar, A., M. Richardson, P.C. Coyte, S. Cheng, B. Sander, and K.K.W. Chan. 2020. "A Cost–Utility Analysis of Atezolizumab in the Second-Line Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Bladder Cancer" Current Oncology 27, no. 4: 386-394. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.27.5459

APA Style

Parmar, A., Richardson, M., Coyte, P. C., Cheng, S., Sander, B., & Chan, K. K. W. (2020). A Cost–Utility Analysis of Atezolizumab in the Second-Line Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Bladder Cancer. Current Oncology, 27(4), 386-394. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.27.5459

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop