Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2025
Cost-effectiveness of second- or third-line treatment with tisotumab vedotin for metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Briceño-Casado María Del Pilar, Sánchez Vegas Adrián, Alegre-Del-Rey Emilio Jesús, Olry de Labry Lima Antonio
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tisotumab vedotin (TV) versus single-agent chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer (r/mCC) after failure of first-line treatment, from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.
METHODS: Cost-utility analysis was conducted using a partitioned survival model with three health states, over a 60-month time horizon. Efficacy data ‒overall survival (OS) and progression free survival‒ were derived from innovaTV-301 trial and modeled using parametric survival functions. Costs and utilities were obtained from national databases and literature, with outcomes expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was calculated, and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore uncertainty.
RESULTS: TV provided an additional 0.341 QALYs over chemotherapy (1.229 vs. 0.889) at an incremental cost of €12,138, resulting in an ICUR of €35,600/QALY, assuming a cost equivalent to cemiplimab. Sensitivity analyses showed ICURs ranging from €33,483-€37,564/QALY depending on modeling assumptions. Drug price and OS benefit were the most influential parameters. Using the foreign list price for TV, the ICUR increased to €950,017/QALY.
CONCLUSIONS: TV offers a modest benefit over chemotherapy in r/mCC and reaches or surpasses the upper bounds of ICER applied in Spain when priced comparably to cemiplimab. The magnitude of clinical benefit remains uncertain.
METHODS: Cost-utility analysis was conducted using a partitioned survival model with three health states, over a 60-month time horizon. Efficacy data ‒overall survival (OS) and progression free survival‒ were derived from innovaTV-301 trial and modeled using parametric survival functions. Costs and utilities were obtained from national databases and literature, with outcomes expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was calculated, and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore uncertainty.
RESULTS: TV provided an additional 0.341 QALYs over chemotherapy (1.229 vs. 0.889) at an incremental cost of €12,138, resulting in an ICUR of €35,600/QALY, assuming a cost equivalent to cemiplimab. Sensitivity analyses showed ICURs ranging from €33,483-€37,564/QALY depending on modeling assumptions. Drug price and OS benefit were the most influential parameters. Using the foreign list price for TV, the ICUR increased to €950,017/QALY.
CONCLUSIONS: TV offers a modest benefit over chemotherapy in r/mCC and reaches or surpasses the upper bounds of ICER applied in Spain when priced comparably to cemiplimab. The magnitude of clinical benefit remains uncertain.