Cost-effectiveness of perioperative nivolumab + neoadjuvant platinum doublet chemotherapy as treatment for resectable non-small cell lung cancer in the United States.

AIMS: CheckMate-77T demonstrated the clinical benefit of perioperative nivolumab plus neoadjuvant platinum-doublet chemotherapy (periNivo + neoCT). This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of periNivo + neoCT as treatment for non-metastatic (Stage IIA-IIIB), resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) vs. relevant comparators in the US.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

Following the natural history of non-metastatic NSCLC, a four-state Markov model was developed. Modeled health states were event-free survival, locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis, and death. CheckMate-77T informed time to progression estimates for periNivo + neoCT and neoCT; mortality estimates leveraged longer-term follow-up available from CheckMate-816. Indirect treatment comparison informed efficacy of comparator treatments not considered in CheckMate-77T. Comparators were neoadjuvant treatment strategies (neoadjuvant nivolumab + chemotherapy [neoNivo + CT], neoadjuvant chemotherapy [neoCT], and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy [neoCRT]), adjuvant chemotherapy (adjCT), and perioperative immuno-therapy (IO) strategies (perioperative durvalumab + neoadjuvant chemotherapy [periDurva + neoCT] and perioperative pembrolizumab + neoadjuvant chemotherapy [periPembro + neoCT]). Cost inputs were obtained from published literature and standard US sources and expressed in 2024 USD. The base-case analysis adopted the perspective of a commercial payer with a lifetime time horizon and discounted cost and health outcomes by 3% annually.

RESULTS

Model results showed that periNivo + neoCT is more effective and costly than comparators. Deterministic incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $84,921, $153,557, $77,976, $60,826, $74,252, $32,069, and $21,974 vs. neoCT, neoNivo + CT, neoCRT, adjCT, surgery, periPembro + neoCT, and periDurva + neoCT, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, periNivo + neoCT resulted in an ICER below $150,000/QALY in 93.3%, 58.2%, 82.4%, 95.1%, 98.3%, 69.9%, and 82.1% of iterations vs. neoCT, neoNivo + CT, neoCRT, adjCT, surgery only, periPembro + neoCT, and periDurva + neoCT, respectively.

LIMITATIONS: Uncertainty in the survival extrapolations reflected the limited body of evidence informing the indirect treatment comparison. ICERs vs. perioperative IO treatment strategies were sensitive to small changes in predicted costs and QALYs, given low incremental base case costs and QALYs.

CONCLUSION

PeriNivo + neoCT is a cost-effective treatment option for patients with resectable, non-metastatic NSCLC.