Third-party Payers Research Articles

Better together? costs of first-line chemoimmunotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Recent advances have created options for first-line (1L) treatment of advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). The study objectives were to describe the utilization of 3 classes of 1L treatment-chemotherapy (CT), immunotherapy (IO), and chemoimmunotherapy (IO+CT)-and the total, third-party payer, direct health care costs. Retrospective, administrative claims database analysis of patients with aNSCLC who initiated 1L treatment between January 1, 2017, and May 31, 2019, with IO, CT, or IO+CT. Microcosting enumerated health care resource utilization, including antineoplastic drug costs, using standardized costs. Generalized linear models estimated per-patient per-month (PPPM) costs during 1L treatment, and adjusted cost differences in 1L among treatment cohorts were calculated using recycled predictions. A total of 1317 IO-, 5315 CT-, and 1522 IO+CT-treated patients were identified. Utilization of CT declined from 72.3% to 47.6% between 2017 and 2019, replaced by use of IO+CT, which increased from 1.8% to 29.8%. Total PPPM costs in 1L were highest with IO+CT at $32,436, compared with $19,000 and $17,763 in the CT and IO cohorts, respectively. Adjusted analyses showed that PPPM costs were $13,933 (95% CI, $11,760-$16,105) higher in the IO+CT vs IO cohort (P < .001) and IO costs were $1024 (95% CI, $67-$1980) lower than CT (P = .04). IO+CT accounts for almost one-third of 1L aNSCLC treatment modalities, coinciding with a reduction in treatment with CT. Costs for patients treated with IO were lower than those for patients treated with both IO+CT and CT alone, driven primarily by antineoplastic drug and associated medical costs.

Early access programs for medicines: comparative analysis among France, Italy, Spain, and UK and focus on the Italian case

Early access programs (EAPs) generally refer to patient access to medicines/indications before marketing authorization, possibly extended to price and reimbursement approval. These programs include compassionate use, which is usually covered by pharmaceutical companies, and EAPs reimbursed by third-party payers. This paper aims at comparing EAPs in four European countries (France, Italy, Spain, UK) and providing empirical evidence on EAPs in Italy. The comparative analysis was conducted through a literature review (including scientific and grey literature), complemented by 30-min semi-structured interviews with local experts. The Italian empirical analysis employed data available on the National Medicines Agency website. Although EAPs are very different across countries, they exhibit some common features: (i) eligibility criteria refer to the absence of valid therapeutic alternatives and a presumed favourable risk–benefit profile; (ii) payers do not allocate a pre-determined budget to these programs; (iii) total spending on EAPs is unknown. The French EAPs seem to be the most structured, financed through social insurance, covering pre-marketing, post-marketing and pre-reimbursement phases and providing for data collection. Italy’s approach to EAPs has been varied, with several programs covered by different payers, including the cohort-based 648 List (for both early access and off-label use), the nominal-based 5% Fund, and Compassionate Use. Most applications to EAPs are from the Antineoplastic and immunomodulating drug class (ATC L). Some 62% of indications in the 648 List are either not under clinical development or have never been approved (pure off-label use). For those subsequently approved, most approved indications coincide with those covered through EAPs. Only the 5% Fund provides data on economic impact (€ 81.2 million in 2021; average cost per patient € 61.5K). Diverse EAPs are a possible source of inequalities in access to medicines across Europe. A harmonization of these programs, though difficult to achieve, could be modelled on the French EAPs and provide key advantages, not least of which a common effort to collect real-world data in parallel with clinical trials and clear separation between EAPs and off-label use programs.

Implementation of Clinical Cytochrome P450 3A Genotyping for Tacrolimus Dosing in a Large Kidney Transplant Program.

Tacrolimus is a calcineurin inhibitor with a narrow therapeutic range and is metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes CYP3A4 and CYP3A5. The Clinical Pharmacogenetic Implementation Consortium published evidence-based guidelines for CYP3A5 normal/intermediate metabolizers prescribed tacrolimus, yet few transplant centers have implemented routine testing. The objective of this study was to implement preemptive CYP3A genotyping into clinical practice in a large kidney transplant program and to evaluate workflow feasibility, potential clinical benefit, and reimbursement to identify barriers and determine sustainability. Preemptive pharmacogenetic testing for CYP3A5 and CYP3A4 was implemented in all patients listed for a kidney transplant as part of standard clinical care. Genotyping was performed at the listing appointment, results were reported as discrete data in the electronic medical record, and education and clinical decision support alerts were developed to provide pharmacogenetic-recommended tacrolimus dosing. During this initial phase, all patients were administered standard tacrolimus dosing, and clinical and reimbursement outcomes were collected. Greater than 99.5% of genotyping claims were reimbursed by third-party payers. CYP3A5 normal/intermediate metabolizers had significantly fewer tacrolimus trough concentrations within the target range and a significantly longer time to their first therapeutic trough compared to poor metabolizers. The challenge of tacrolimus dosing is magnified in the African American population. The US Food and Drug Administration drug label recommends increased starting doses in African ancestry, yet only ≈66% of African Americans in our cohort were normal/intermediate metabolizers who required higher doses. Routine CYP3A5 genotyping may overcome this issue by using genotype over race as a more accurate predictor of drug response.

Health Care Value in Plastic Surgery Practice.

As value-based care gains traction in response to towering health care expenditures and issues of health care inequity, hospital capacity, and labor shortages, it is important to consider how a value-based approach can be achieved in plastic surgery. Value is defined as outcomes divided by costs across entire cycles of care. Drawing on previous studies and policies, this article identifies key opportunities in plastic surgery to move the levers of costs and outcomes to deliver higher value care. Specifically, outcomes in plastic surgery should include conventional measures of complication rates and patient-reported outcome measures to drive quality improvement and benchmark payments. Meanwhile, cost reduction in plastic surgery can be achieved through value-based payment reform, efficient workflows, evidence-based and cost-conscious selection of medical devices, and greater use of outpatient surgical facilities. Lastly, the authors discuss how the diminished presence of third-party payers in aesthetic surgery exemplifies the cost-conscious and patient-centered nature of value-based plastic surgery. To lead in future health policy and care delivery reform, plastic surgeons should strive for high-value care, remain open to new ways of care delivery, and understand how plastic surgery fits into overall health care delivery.

Cost-effectiveness of sacituzumab govitecan in hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

The efficiency and safety of sacituzumab govitecan (SG) for the therapy of hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (BC) has been demonstrated. The aim of this study is to evaluate its cost-effectiveness on HR+/HER2- metastatic BC from the third-party payer perspective in the United States. We performed the cost-effectiveness of SG and chemotherapy using a partitioned survival model. TROPiCS-02 provided clinical patients for this study. We evaluated the robustness of this study by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses were also conducted. The outcomes were costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefit (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB). SG treatment was related to an increase of 0.284 life years and 0.217 QALYs over chemotherapy, as well as a cost increase of $132,689, reaching an ICER of $612,772/QALY. The INHB was -0.668 QALYs, and the INMB was -$100,208. SG was not cost-effective at the willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY. The outcomes were sensitive to patient body weight and cost of SG. SG may be cost-effective at the WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY if the price is less than $3.997/mg or the weight of patients is under 19.88 kg. Based on the subgroup analysis, SG did not prove cost-effective in all subgroups at the WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY. From a third-party payer standpoint in the United States, SG was not cost-effective, even though it had a clinically significant advantage over chemotherapy for the treatment of HR+/HER2- metastatic BC. The cost-effectiveness of SG can be improved if the price is substantially reduced.

Looking back: a review of policy implications for exercise oncology.

The evidence to support the benefits of exercise for people living with and beyond cancer is robust. Still, exercise oncology interventions in the United States are only eligible for coverage by third-party payers within the restrictions of cancer rehabilitation settings. Without expanded coverage, access will remain highly inequitable, tending toward the most well-resourced. This article describes the pathway to third-party coverage for 3 programs that address a chronic disease and utilize exercise professionals: the Diabetes Prevention Program, Supervised Exercise Training for Peripheral Artery Disease, and Cancer Rehabilitation. Lessons learned will be applied toward expanding third-party coverage for exercise oncology programming.

Cost of bladder cancer in Lebanon before and after the economic collapse: a probabilistic modeling study

Background and objectivesLebanon has one of the highest incidence rates of bladder cancer (BC) in the world. In 2019, Lebanon’s economy collapsed which majorly impacted healthcare costs and coverage. This study assesses the overall direct costs of urothelial BC in Lebanon, from the perspective of public and private third-party payers (TPP) and households, and evaluates the impact of the economic collapse on these costs.MethodsThis was a quantitative, incidence-based cost-of-illness study, conducted using a macro-costing approach. Costs of medical procedures were obtained from the records of various TPPs and the Ministry of Public Health. We modeled the clinical management processes for each stage of BC, and conducted probabilistic sensitivity analyses to estimate and compare the cost of each stage, pre-and post-collapse, and for each payer category.ResultsBefore the collapse, the total annual cost of BC in Lebanon was estimated at LBP 19,676,494,000 (USD 13,117,662). Post-collapse, the total annual cost of BC in Lebanon increased by 768% and was estimated at LBP 170,727,187,000 (USD 7,422,921). TPP payments increased by 61% whereas out-of-pocket (OOP) payments increased by 2,745% resulting in a decrease in TPP coverage to only 17% of total costs.ConclusionOur study shows that BC in Lebanon constitutes a significant economic burden costing 0.32% of total health expenditures. The economic collapse induced an increase of 768% in the total annual cost, and a catastrophic increase in OOP payments.

Bariatric surgeon perceptions of the safety of same-day sleeve gastrectomy in the state of Massachusetts.

During the past 2.5 years, select bariatric surgeons in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have been implementing same-day sleeve gastrectomy (SDSG). Key reasons for this change have been to reduce risks associated with hospitalization in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and to comply with third-party payer preference to reduce costs. We aimed to evaluate bariatric surgeons' attitudes about outcomes and morbidity between patients who are hospitalized after sleeve gastrectomy and patients who undergo SDSG. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts (teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School). This prospective cohort study was conducted among bariatric surgeons practicing in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. An anonymous web-based questionnaire was distributed using the Research Electronic Data Capture software. A total of 58 bariatric surgeons in Massachusetts were identified and successfully contacted based on registration with the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine, membership in the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, and internet search. A total of 33 bariatric surgeons in Massachusetts completed the survey, yielding a response rate of 56.9%. Among the respondents, 75.76% have not performed SDSG, reporting patient safety as the major concern, and 24.24% had performed SDSG in the past. Survey responses showed no significant differences in surgeon perception between SDSG and hospitalization after surgery. Optimal patient selection was an important factor influencing surgeons' decisions with regard to performing SDSG. However, bariatric surgeons in Massachusetts are reluctant to perform SDSG.

52. Stop Denying It: Billing Claims in Reduction Mammaplasty

PURPOSE: Despite evidence documenting the physical and psychological benefit of breast reduction, insurance claims remain a cumbersome process. The objective of this study was to assess denials of insurance claims for reduction mammaplasty in a national cohort. METHODS: We partnered with the Auctus Group to prospectively collect data on all of their plastic surgery clients with denied breast reduction claims (CPT 19318) from January 2022 through August 2022. Data harvested included claim status, reason for denial, network status and other related variables. Descriptive statistics were performed where appropriate. RESULTS: There were 216 denials from insurance companies during this period with an average of 1.37 denials per claim. Of the 158 initial denials, 104 (65.8%) of these were from claims that had already received prior-authorization. Of the remaining 34.1% denied claims, third-party payers stated that no prior-authorization was necessary in 22.2% of cases (n=12/54). The most frequent cited reasons for claim denial were medical record requests (n=80, 37%), non-covered charges (n=61, 28.2%), and medical necessity (n=26, 12%). Over 25% of claims were denied a twice by insurance providers. Nearly 10% of claims required tertiary appeals and one case was approved on the quaternary appeal. Distribution of denials was equally dispersed amongst claims that were in- versus out-of-network. Average claim to payment period was 45.3 days. CONCLUSION: Even for practices following third-party payer established prior-authorization guidelines, denials for breast reduction claims are occurring at high rates creating unnecessary administrative burden. Continual advocacy is needed to reduce these inefficiencies for plastic surgery practices.

Cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

In patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), cemiplimab plus chemotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) significantly compared to chemotherapy alone. The cost-effectiveness of these drugs is still uncertain. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab plus chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy for the treatment of aNSCLC from the third-party payer perspective in the United States. The cost-effectiveness of cemiplimab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for the treatment of aNSCLC was evaluated using a partitioned survival model containing three mutually incompatible health states. The clinical characteristics and outcomes used in the model were gathered from EMPOWER-Lung 3 trial. We have conducted deterministic one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis in order to evaluate the robustness of the model. The primary outcomes considered were the costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefits (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB). Treatment of aNSCLC with cemiplimab plus chemotherapy increased efficacy by 0.237 QALYs and was associated with an increased total cost of $50,796 compared to chemotherapy alone, resulting in an ICER of $214,256/QALY gained. At a WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY, the INHB of cemiplimab plus chemotherapy was 0.203 QALYs and the INMB was $304,704 compared to chemotherapy alone. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that there was only a 0.04% chance that cemiplimab with chemotherapy would be cost-effective at a WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY. The performance of model was mainly determined by the price of cemiplimab, according to a one-way sensitivity analysis. From the third-party payer perspective, cemiplimab combined chemotherapy is unlikely to be a cost-effective option for the treatment of aNSCLC at the WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY in the United States.

Expanding the use of brief cognitive assessments to detect suspected early-stage cognitive impairment in primary care.

Mild cognitive impairment remains substantially underdiagnosed, especially in disadvantaged populations. Failure to diagnose deprives patients and families of the opportunity to treat reversible causes, make necessary life and lifestyle changes and receive disease-modifying treatments if caused by Alzheimer's disease. Primary care, as the entry point for most, plays a critical role in improving detection rates. We convened a Work Group of national experts to develop consensus recommendations for policymakers and third-party payers on ways to increase the use of brief cognitive assessments (BCAs) in primary care. The group recommended three strategies to promote routine use of BCAs: providing primary care clinicians with suitable assessment tools; integrating BCAs into routine workflows; and crafting payment policies to encourage adoption of BCAs. Sweeping changes and actions of multiple stakeholders are necessary to improve detection rates of mild cognitive impairment so that patients and families may benefit from timely interventions.

Budget Impact Analysis of the FreeStyle Libre Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring System® in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Multiple Daily Insulin Injections in Argentina.

To estimate the budget impact of the potential coverage of FreeStyle Libre Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (FSL) for glycemia monitoring in all type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients and in those with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with multiple daily insulin injections, from the social security and the private third-party payer's perspective in Argentina. A budget impact model was developed to estimate the cost difference between the self-monitoring of blood glucose (standard of care) and FSL over 5years. Input parameters were retrieved from local literature complemented by expert opinion. Health care costs were estimated by a micro-costing approach and reported in USD as of April 2022 (1 USD = 113.34 Argentine pesos). One-way sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted. From a social security third-party payer perspective, the incorporation of FSL was associated with net savings per member per month (PMPM) of $0.026 (Year 1) to $0.097 (Year 5) and net savings PMPM of $0.002 (Year 1) to $0.008 (Year 5) for T1DM and T2DM patients, respectively. Similar findings are reported from the private third-party payer perspective. The budget impact results were more sensitive to the acquisition costs of the FSL and test strips. The potential coverage of FSL in patients with T1DM and T2DM with multiple daily insulin injections could be associated with small financial savings considering current technology acquisition costs (FSL and test strips) for social security and the private sector third-party payers in Argentina.

Temporomandibular disorders: current status of research, education, policies, and its impact on clinicians in the United States of America.

Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) encompass a number of different musculoskeletal disorders often accompanied by pain and dysfunction. Most TMDs are acute, but can become chronic leading to disability and quality of life issues. There is wide variation in treatment of TMDs, including both conservative/reversible therapies as well as invasive/irreversible treatments, which present difficulties for clinicians, patients, and third-party payers as to what constitutes appropriate care. Data sources: A recent report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine highlighted a number of deficiencies, most notably in the education of TMDs within United States of America dental schools at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral (dental) levels as well as addressing the historic inconsistencies in both diagnosis and treatment. New areas for research and interprofessional collaboration should assist in the understanding of TMDs, and updated clinical practice guidelines should help reduce variation in the delivery of evidence-based care. Recently, the American Dental Association recognized orofacial pain as a specialty, which should increase the level and availability of expertise in treating these issues. Summary: Based on the current best evidence, this report is an attempt to alert the profession to discontinue irreversible and invasive therapies for the vast majority of TMDs and recognize that the majority of these disorders are amenable to conservative, reversible interventions.

Finding the Financial Margin Expansion Leverage in the Medical Practice

All U.S. medical groups, especially the independents, are under financial pressure from third-party payers, both commercial and governmental. These pressures come in the form of unit price controls, services utilization constraints, and total costs of care oversight, especially for the management of chronic conditions. The only solution to the deterioration of practice operating economics and related financial performance is operating margin expansion strategies—the expansion of the margin that funds the provider compensation pool. Such strategies are available. The principal challenges to margin expansion often are products of entrenched, and frequently intractable, clinical models and related business models, together with facility constraints, and access to investment capital that doesn’t excessively draw down physician compensation.

Estimated Therapy Costs and Downstream Cost Consequences of iBASIS–Video Interaction to Promote Positive Parenting Intervention vs Usual Care Among Children Displaying Early Behavioral Signs of Autism in Australia

The growing global prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is associated with increasing costs for support services. Ascertaining the effects of a successful preemptive intervention for infants showing early behavioral signs of autism on human services budgets is highly policy relevant. To estimate the net cost impact of the iBASIS-Video Interaction to Promote Positive Parenting (iBASIS-VIPP) intervention on the Australian government. Infants (aged 12 months) showing early behavioral indicators of autism were recruited through community settings into the multicenter Australian iBASIS-VIPP randomized clinical trial (RCT), a 5- to 6-month preemptive parent-mediated intervention, between June 9, 2016, and March 30, 2018, and were followed up for 18 months to age 3 years. This economic evaluation, including cost analysis (intervention and cost consequences) and cost-effectiveness analyses of iBASIS-VIPP compared with usual care (treatment as usual [TAU]), modeled outcomes observed at age 3 through to 12 years (13th birthday) and was conducted from April 1, 2021, to January 30, 2023. Data analysis was conducted from July 1, 2021, to January 29, 2023. iBASIS-VIPP intervention. To project the diagnostic trajectory and associated disability support costs drawing on the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), the main outcome was the differential treatment cost of iBASIS-VIPP plus TAU vs TAU and disability-related government costs modeled to age 12 years, using a clinical diagnosis of ASD and developmental delay (with autism traits) at 3 years. Costs were calculated in Australian dollars and converted to US dollars. Economic performance was measured through the following: (1) differential net present value (NPV) cost (iBASIS-VIPP less TAU), (2) investment return (dollars saved for each dollar invested, taking a third-party payer perspective), (3) break-even age when treatment cost was offset by downstream cost savings, and (4) cost-effectiveness in terms of the differential treatment cost per differential ASD diagnosis at age 3 years. Alternate values of key parameters were modeled in 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the latter identifying the likelihood of an NPV cost savings. Of the 103 infants enrolled in the iBASIS-VIPP RCT, 70 (68.0%) were boys. Follow-up data at age 3 years were available for 89 children who received TAU (44 [49.4%]) or iBASIS-VIPP (45 [50.6%]) and were included in this analysis. The estimated mean differential treatment cost was A $5131 (US $3607) per child for iBASIS-VIPP less TAU. The best estimate of NPV cost savings was A $10 695 (US $7519) per child (discounted at 3% per annum). For each dollar invested in treatment, a savings of A $3.08 (US $3.08) was estimated; the break-even cost occurred at age 5.3 years (approximately 4 years after intervention delivery). The mean differential treatment cost per lower incident case of ASD was A $37 181 (US $26 138). We estimated that there was an 88.9% chance that iBASIS-VIPP would deliver a cost savings for the NDIS, the dominant third-party payer. The results of this study suggest that iBASIS-VIPP represents a likely good-value societal investment for supporting neurodivergent children. The estimated net cost savings were considered conservative, as they covered only third-party payer costs incurred by the NDIS and outcomes were modeled to just age 12 years. These findings further suggest that preemptive interventions may be a feasible, effective, and efficient new clinical pathway for ASD, reducing disability and the costs of support services. Long-term follow-up of children receiving preemptive intervention is needed to confirm the modeled results.

Abstract 4364: Cost-effectiveness analysis of abemaciclib and endocrine therapy combination for the adjuvant treatment of HR+/HER2-, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer

Abstract Background: Abemaciclib is the only approved cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor approved for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative (HR+/HER2-), node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (EBC) patients. However, the addition of abemaciclib to the standard of care endocrine therapy (ET, such as tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors) results in a drastic increase to the overall healthcare costs. Objective: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of abemaciclib and ET combination versus ET monotherapy for the adjuvant treatment of HR+/HER2-, EBC from the U.S. third-party payer perspective. Methods: A Markov-based decision analytic model using TreeAge Software was developed. The model simulated lifetime costs and health outcomes over a lifetime. The model incorporated the disease course of the progression-free disease, progressive disease, death due to disease, and mortality due to other causes. All clinical data and utilities were derived from the literature and clinical trial: monarchE. Notable adverse events such as neutropenia, leucopenia, anemia, and diarrhea were included. Age-specific mortality risk was calculated from the U.S. life tables. The outcomes were measured by costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $100,000 per QALY gained. Results: We simulated our analysis on patients assigned to either abemaciclib + ET or ET alone groups as per the monarchE trial. The median age of the patients was 51 years. In base case analysis, the total costs for abemaciclib plus ET and ET alone treatment, were USD 122,052.11 and USD 40,344.87, respectively. Abemaciclib plus ET treatment produced 4.5 QALYs, while the ET treatment alone produced 4.31 QALYs. Overall, abemaciclib plus ET was marginally more effective than ET with an additional 0.20 QALYs but much costlier with an ICER of $417,780.18/QALY. For utilities ranging from 0.41 to 0.69, the ICERs ranged from USD 36,5950 to USD 4,463,866.59 per QALY, which exceeded the WTP threshold. Using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, we estimated that the combination of abemaciclib plus ET was a cost-effective strategy at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $500,000 per QALY or higher for the base case population. Conclusion: At current costs, abemaciclib plus ET is not cost-effective as compared to ET monotherapy for patients with node-positive, high-risk, HR+/HER2- EBC in the US healthcare system from the third-party payer perspective. Citation Format: Ashna Talwar, Ashish Deshmukh, Meghana Trivedi, Rajender R. Aparasu. Cost-effectiveness analysis of abemaciclib and endocrine therapy combination for the adjuvant treatment of HR+/HER2-, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 4364.

The NP's role in increasing RVU values.

The NP's role in increasing RVU values.

Cost-Effectiveness of Lisocabtagene Maraleucel Versus Axicabtagene Ciloleucel and Tisagenlecleucel in the Third-Line or Later Treatment Setting for Relapsed or Refractory Large B-cell Lymphoma in the United States.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus other available chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies, including axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), in patients who had received at least two prior therapies from a United States (US) commercial third-party payer perspective. To capture this heterogeneity in survival outcomes, we used mixture cure models to extrapolate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patient-level data from TRANSCEND NHL 001 for liso-cel and reconstructed patient-level data from ZUMA-1 for axi-cel, JULIET for tisa-cel, and SCHOLAR-1 for salvage chemotherapy, derived using the Guyot method, were used for OS and PFS. The model included adverse events associated with liso-cel, axi-cel, and tisa-cel. Liso-cel was less costly (incremental cost of - $74,980) and marginally more effective (0.002 incremental quality-adjusted life-years [QALY]) than axi-cel and had an incremental cost of $67,925 and 2.02 incremental QALYs over tisa-cel in the base case. Results remained consistent in sensitivity analyses, with the liso-cel OS cure fraction being the main driver of cost-effectiveness compared with both axi-cel and tisa-cel. This analysis estimated that liso-cel is cost-effective compared with tisa-cel and axi-cel from a commercial US payer perspective.

Cost Effectiveness of CDK4/6 Inhibitors in the First-Line Treatment of HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women in the USA.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors improve progression-free survival when combined with endocrine therapies in patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer. However, the comparative cost effectiveness of utilizing three US Food and Drug Administration-approved CDK4/6 inhibitors is unknown. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of individual CDK4/6 inhibitors (palbociclib, ribociclib, abemaciclib) with letrozole versus letrozole monotherapy in the first-line treatment of hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer in the USA. We constructed a Markov-based decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapies over a 40-year lifetime from a third-party payer perspective. The model incorporated health states (progression-free disease, progressive disease, and death), major adverse events (neutropenia), and cancer-specific and all-cause mortality. Using clinical efficacy and quality-of-life scores (utility) data from clinical trials, we estimated quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios using Medicare charges reported in US dollars per 2022 valuation and a discount rate of 3% applied to costs and outcomes. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to evaluate parametric and decision uncertainty. Compared to letrozole, the model estimated an increase of 5.72, 5.87, and 6.39 in QALYs and costs of $799,178, $788,168, and $741,102 in combining palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib plus letrozole, respectively. Palbociclib or ribociclib plus letrozole were dominated by abemaciclib plus letrozole. Compared with letrozole, abemaciclib plus letrozole resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $457,538 per QALY with an incremental cost of $553,621 and an incremental QALY gain of 1.21. The results were sensitive to the cost of abemaciclib, disease progression utility, and patients' age. At a willingness to pay of $100,000/QALY gained, our model predicts that combining CDK4/6 inhibitors plus letrozole is not cost effective with a marginal increase in QALYs at a high cost. Lowering the cost of these drugs or identifying patients who can receive maximal benefit from CDK4/6 inhibitors would improve the value of this regimen in patients.

Cost-utility and budget impact analysis of CPAP therapy compared to no treatment in the management of moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea in Colombia from a third-party payer perspective

ABSTRACT Objectives To conduct cost-utility and budget impact analysis of providing Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) therapy versus no treatment for moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in Colombia from a third-party payer perspective. Methods We used a Markov model to assess the cost-utility and budget impact analysis of CPAP in patients over 40 years old with moderate to severe OSA. Data on effectiveness and utility values were obtained from published literature. A discount rate of 5% was applied for outcomes and costs. ICER was calculated and compared against the threshold estimated for Colombia, which is 86% of the GDP per capita. Results Over a lifetime horizon, the base case analysis showed the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained with CPAP therapy was COP$3,503,804 (USD$1,011 in 2020 prices). The budget impact analysis showed that the adoption of CPAP therapy in the target population would lead to a cumulative net budget impact of COP$411,722 million (USD$118,784,412 in, 2020 prices) over five years of time horizon. Conclusions CPAP was cost-effective compared to no-treatment in OSA. According to the budget impact analysis, adopting this technology would require a budget allocation that is partially offset by reduced number of strokes and traffic accident events.