Cost‐effectiveness analysis of tislelizumab in combination with chemotherapy for the first‐line treatment of patients with metastatic or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma in China

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe combination of tislelizumab and gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) in the first‐line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (R/M NPC) has yielded significant results. However, it is not clear whether this treatment option is cost‐effective in China. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of tislelizumab plus GP for the first‐line treatment of R/M NPC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.MethodsA partitioned survival model with three discrete health states was constructed to evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of tislelizumab plus GP versus GP in patients with R/M NPC. The target population enrolled in the RATIONALE‐309 trial had previously not treated for R/M NPC. Drug costs were obtained from relevant databases, and the remaining cost and health utility data were collected from the literature. The main outcomes include the expected life years, quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs), total cost, and incremental cost–benefit ratio (ICER).ResultsThe tislelizumab plus GP regimen produced an additional cost ($18392.76) and additional 1.57 QALYs compared with GP used alone. The ICER was $18392.75/QALYs. Sensitivity analysis showed that the analysis was robust and the utility of PD status was most sensitive to the model results. The possibility of tislelizumab plus GP being cost‐effective at the willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) threshold of $37 653/QALY was 99.8%. Subgroup analysis showed that high PD‐L1 expression had little impact on the ICER of this regimen.ConclusionIn patients with R/M NPC, the regimen of tislelizumab plus GP, as the first‐line treatment, is more cost‐effective than the GP regimen in China.