Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab Targeted-Therapy in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Publisher



Mohammadnezhad G1 ; Esmaily H2 ; Talebi M3 ; Jafari M4
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. School of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  2. 2. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  3. 3. School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
  4. 4. School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Source: Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer Published:2024


Abstract

Background: Atezolizumab (ATZ) plus bevacizumab (BVC) co-administration is one of the newest systemic interventions in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (AHCC). This treatment approach is more costly and effective than other therapeutic interventions, significantly improving AHCC survival and health-related quality of life. Aim: This economic study aimed to systematically review all cost-effectiveness analyses of ATZ/BVC combination in AHCC. Method: A comprehensive search in scientific databases was performed using a highly sensitive syntax to find all related economic evaluations. The target population was AHCC patients. The intervention was ATZ/BVC, which was compared with sorafenib, nivolumab, and other anticancer strategies. We included studies that reported quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and/or life-years, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and finally, the characteristics of included studies were categorized. Results: Out of 315 identified records, 12 cost-effectiveness analyses were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. Treatment costs were significantly higher with ATZ/BVC in all studies (from 61,397 to 253,687 USD/patient compared to sorafenib and nivolumab, respectively). Incremental QALYs/patient varied from 0.35 to 0.86 compared to sintilimab/BVC and sorafenib. Although ICERs for drugs varied widely, all were united in the lack of cost-effectiveness of the ATZ/BVC. The willingness-to-pay threshold in all studies was lower than the ICER, which indicated a reluctance to pay for this treatment strategy by the health systems. Conclusion: The ATZ/BVC combination is an expensive targeted immunotherapy in AHCC. Significant discounts in ATZ and BVC prices are essential for this novel approach to be cost-effective and extensively used. © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2024.