In early 2018, durvalumab became the first immunotherapy to be approved for adjuvant treatment of patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose cancer has not progressed after definitive chemoradiotherapy. However, the cost-effectiveness and potential economic implications of using this high-priced therapy in this indication are unknown to date. OBJECTIVE To explore the cost-effectiveness and potential budgetary consequences of durvalumab consolidation therapy vs no consolidation therapy after chemoradiotherapy in stage III NSCLC in the context of the US health care system. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A decision analytic microsimulation model was developed in an academic medical setting to compare the following 2 postchemoradiotherapy strategies: all patients receive no consolidation therapy until progression vs all patients receive durvalumab consolidation therapy until progression or for a maximum of 1 year. The potential budgetary consequence was calculated by applying the proportion of patients with NSCLC who were diagnosed in stage III and received chemoradiotherapy to the projected number of annual new cases for 2018 to 2022 to find total eligible patients and then multiplied by the mean difference in annual cost between the strategies over this 5-year period. Simulated conditions were matched to those of the PACIFIC phase 3 randomized clinical trial and reasonable treatment strategies for metastatic NSCLC. All simulated patients begin disease free after having received radical treatment with chemoradiotherapy and are followed up as they progress to metastatic disease first-line treatment, metastatic disease second-line treatment, end-stage progressive disease, and death. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The main outcome of this study was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of durvalumab consolidation therapy vs no consolidation therapy, given as aggregate cost of treatment per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

No abstract

BackgroundWe studied trends in lung cancer treatment cost over time by phase of care, treatment strategy, age, stage at diagnosis, and histology.MethodsUsing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)‐Medicare database for years 1998‐2013, we allocated total and patient‐liability costs into the following phases of care for 145 988 lung cancer patients: prediagnosis, staging, surgery, initial, continuing, and terminal. Patients served as self‐controls to determine cancer‐attributable costs based on individual precancer diagnosis healthcare costs. We fit linear regression models to determine cost by age and calendar year for each stage at diagnosis, histology, and treatment strategy and presented all costs in 2017 US dollars.ResultsMonthly healthcare costs prior to lung cancer diagnosis were $861 for a 70 years old in 2017 and rose by an average of $17 per year (P < 0.001). Surgery in 2017 cost $30 096, decreasing by $257 per year (P = 0.007). Chemotherapy and radiation costs remained stable or increased for most stage and histology groups, ranging from $4242 to $8287 per month during the initial six months of care. Costs during the final six months of life decreased for those who died of lung cancer or other causes.ConclusionsCost‐effectiveness analyses of lung cancer control interventions in the United States have been using outdated and incomplete treatment cost estimates. Our cost estimates enable updated cost‐effectiveness analyses to determine the benefit of lung cancer control from a health economics point of view.