Satricabtagene autoleucel

Mosunetuzumab has received accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration for adult patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL) after two or more lines of systemic therapy. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of mosunetuzumab for the treatment of R/R FL from a US private payer perspective.

A partitioned survival model simulated lifetime costs and outcomes of mosunetuzumab against seven comparators: axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), tazemetostat (taz, EZH2 wild-type only), rituximab plus lenalidomide (R-Len) or bendamustine (R-Benda), obinutuzumab plus bendamustine (O-Benda), and a retrospective real-world cohort (RW) based on current patterns of care derived from US electronic health records (Flatiron Health). Efficacy data for mosunetuzumab were from the pivotal Phase II GO29781 trial (NCT02500407). Relative treatment efficacy was estimated from indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs). Costs included were related to treatment, adverse events, routine care, and terminal care. Except for drug costs (March 2023), all costs were inflated to 2022 US dollars. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY.

Mosunetuzumab dominated taz, tisa-cel, and axi-cel with greater QALYs and lower costs. Mosunetuzumab was projected to be cost-effective against R-Benda, O-Benda, and RW with ICERs of $78,607, $42,731, and $21,434, respectively. Mosunetuzumab incurred lower costs but lower QALYs vs. R-Len. NMBs showed that mosunetuzumab was cost-effective against comparators except R-Len.

Without head-to-head comparative data, the model had to rely on ITCs, some of which were affected by residual bias. Model inputs were obtained from multiple sources. Extensive sensitivity analyses assessed the importance of these uncertainties.

Mosunetuzumab is estimated to be cost-effective compared with approved regimens except R-Len for the treatment of adults with R/R FL.

The implementation of chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) therapy in the real-world setting is hindered by logistical and financial barriers, impacting timely access to this life-saving treatment. Clinical trials have reported the time from leukapheresis to CAR T cell infusion (vein-to-vein time) but not the time from CAR T referral to infusion (decision-to-vein time). Herein, we report the barriers to CAR T therapy in a real-world setting. We evaluated the factors influencing the decision-to-vein time and explored the association with clinical outcomes in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who received CAR T therapy. We conducted a retrospective study of adult patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL who underwent consultation for CAR T cell therapy at Levine Cancer Institute and Wake Forest Comprehensive Cancer Center and collected information regarding demographic data, referral type, insurance type, CAR T product, and survival outcomes. The effects of variables on decision-to-vein time were analyzed by Fisher's exact test for categorial variables and Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazard models. The study included 142 patients who were referred for CAR T of which 99 patients received CAR T. Median decision-to-vein time was 62 days compared to median vein-to-vein time of 32 days. Patients with private insurance took longer to obtain financial clearance compared to patients with government insurance (median 25 versus 9 days, P < .001). Of those with private insurance (n = 63), 35% needed a single-case agreement (SCA) which led to significant delay in receiving financial clearance (median 50.5 versus 19 days, P < .001) and increased decision-to-vein time (median 75 versus 55 days, P < .001) compared to those who did not need SCA. Decision-to-vein time was significantly different among various products, clinical trial being the shortest (median 47 days, n = 9) and non-conforming products being the longest (median 94.5 days, n = 6) (P< .001). Axi-cel had the shortest median decision-to-vein time at 61 days compared to 81 days with tisa-cel and 85 days with liso-cel. Although delays in receiving CAR T therapy did not impact survival, the median overall survival for patients who were referred for CAR T therapy but did not receive it, was significantly lower than those who received CAR T cell therapy (9.0 versus 21.0 months, P < .001). Decision-to-vein time is a major cause of delay in receiving CAR T therapy. SCAs lead to significant increase in decision-to-vein time leading to delays in CAR T therapy in a real-world setting. Patients who were referred for CAR T but are not able to receive it, have inferior survival compared to CAR T recipients. Our findings underscore the significance of addressing administrative hurdles, such as SCAs and insurance approvals, for timely access to CAR T therapy for patients with DLBCL.