Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Camrelizumab Immunotherapy versus Docetaxel or Irinotecan Chemotherapy as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Abstract

PurposeThe aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab immunotherapy versus docetaxel or irinotecan chemotherapy as second-line therapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), which was evaluated in the ESCORT trial.Materials and MethodsA partitioned survival model was developed to reflect the costs and effectiveness of the ESCORT trial. The clinical efficacy data, safety data, and health-related costs and utilities were derived from published data from clinical trials or health administration departments in China. Adverse event-related costs, drug administration, and other expenses were derived from a single center of Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital in 2021. All survival analyses were performed with SPSS software. Overall survival was estimated with the Kaplan–Meier method, and progression-free survival was estimated with the life table method. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the uncertainty of the model. Incremental cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated.ResultsCamrelizumab therapy had 0.232 QALYs at an incremental cost of USD$9959.44 compared with the chemotherapy group with 0.158 QALYs at an incremental cost of USD$8601.67. The ICER was USD$18393.12/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that when the willingness-to-pay threshold reached USD$31200/QALY, which is nearly three times the Chinese gross domestic product per capita, camrelizumab had an 80% possibility of being cost-effective versus docetaxel or irinotecan chemotherapy.ConclusionCamrelizumab is a cost-effective option compared with docetaxel or irinotecan chemotherapy in patients with advanced ESCC as second-line therapy in China.