» Articles » PMID: 23057750

Ipilimumab in 2nd Line Treatment of Patients with Advanced Melanoma: a Cost-effectiveness Analysis

Overview
Journal J Med Econ
Date 2012 Oct 13
PMID 23057750
Citations 23
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) compared with best supportive care (BSC) in pre-treated advanced melanoma patients.

Methods: The analysis was based on a US payer perspective and lifetime time horizon. A three-state Markov model was developed representing clinical outcomes, quality-of-life, and healthcare resource use of patients treated with ipilimumab and BSC. Transitions between states were modeled using overall and progression-free survival data from the MDX010-20 trial. Utility data were from a melanoma-specific study of the health state preferences of the general population. Disease management costs expressed in 2011 US Dollars were based on healthcare resource use observed in a US retrospective medical chart study. Uncertainty was analyzed using one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results: The gain in life years and QALYs from introducing ipilimumab over BSC were 1.88 years (95% CI = 1.62-2.20) and 1.14 (95% CI = 1.01-1.34) QALYs, respectively, over the lifetime time horizon. The estimated incremental cost of treating with ipilimumab vs BSC was $146,716 (95% CI = $130,992-$164,025). The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $78,218 per life year gained and $128,656 per QALY gained. Ipilimumab was 95% likely to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of $146,000/QALY.

Limitations: Ipilimumab's method of action causes a tumor response pattern that differs from the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors upon which the model is based, leading to a potential under-estimate of quality-of-life of ipilimumab patients. Survival and QALY gains were related to the time horizon of the analysis. Sensitivity analyses indicated that qualitative conclusions regarding the cost-effectiveness of ipilimumab were unchanged when the method of quality adjustment and the time horizon were varied.

Conclusion: The analysis shows that the estimated cost-effectiveness of ipilimumab is within what has been shown to be acceptable to payers for oncology products in the US.

Citing Articles

Development of a Decision Model to Estimate the Outcomes of Treatment Sequences in Advanced Melanoma.

de Groot S, Blommestein H, Leeneman B, Uyl-de Groot C, Haanen J, Wouters M Med Decis Making. 2025; :272989X251319338.

PMID: 39985400 PMC: 11894896. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X251319338.


Bioinformatics analysis of prognostic value and immune cell infiltration of gene in cutaneous melanoma.

Hu F, Mei R, Zhang H, Hao D, Li W Ann Transl Med. 2022; 10(18):966.

PMID: 36267715 PMC: 9577739. DOI: 10.21037/atm-22-3873.


Nivolumab Versus Sorafenib as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Li Y, Liang X, Li H, Yang T, Guo S, Chen X Front Pharmacol. 2022; 13:906956.

PMID: 35928269 PMC: 9343987. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.906956.


Cost-Effectiveness of Ipilimumab Plus Anti-PD-1 Therapy Ipilimumab Alone in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma Resistant to Anti-PD-(L)1 Monotherapy.

Peng Y, Zeng X, Peng L, Liu Q, Yi L, Luo X Front Oncol. 2021; 11:743765.

PMID: 34858820 PMC: 8630699. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.743765.


Estimated Cost-effectiveness of Atezolizumab Plus Cobimetinib and Vemurafenib for Treatment of BRAF V600 Variation Metastatic Melanoma.

Cai C, Yunusa I, Tarhini A JAMA Netw Open. 2021; 4(11):e2132262.

PMID: 34762112 PMC: 8586909. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.32262.