Economic Evaluation of Sintilimab Plus Bevacizumab Versus Sorafenib as a First-line Treatment for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Introduction This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sintilimab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib as a first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in China to provide economic evidence to inform health decision making. Methods We performed an economic evaluation from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system using a partitioned survival model with three mutually exclusive health states: progression free, post-progression, and death. Efficacy data were obtained from the ORIENT-32 clinical trial and extrapolated to the lifetime horizon. Cost and utility values were derived from published studies and online price databases. The primary outcomes of the model were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were carried out to verify the robustness of the model results. Results Compared with sorafenib, sintilimab plus bevacizumab incurred a higher lifetime cost ($33,766 vs. $23,294) and yielded more QALYs (1.428 vs. 0.928 QALYs). The ICER for sintilimab plus bevacizumab was $20,968/QALY and lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold of $33,592. The results of sensitivity analysis showed that ICER values were most sensitive to the subsequent treatment cost of the sorafenib group after progression and the price of bevacizumab. In the scenario analysis, the ICER was $4191/QALY when a 7.5 mg/kg dose of bevacizumab was applied in the model. Conclusions Compared with sorafenib, the sintilimab plus bevacizumab combination is likely to be a cost-effective option for patients with unresectable HCC in China.

Automated summary

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of sintilimab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib as a first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in China. The results showed that sintilimab plus bevacizumab incurred higher lifetime costs but yielded more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared to sorafenib. The combination therapy was found to be a cost-effective option for patients with unresectable HCC in China.