Cost-effectiveness of sotorasib versus adagrasib in previously treated G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC: a US healthcare payer perspective.

[AIM] To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sotorasib versus adagrasib in the second- and later lines of treatment for G12C non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from a US private payer perspective.

[METHODS] A standard three-state partitioned survival model was used with a 20 year (life-time) horizon. Equivalent progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assumed in the base case based on published matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) of Phase 2 and 3 data, and time-to-death utilities applied. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) common to both treatments were included. Direct costs and health benefits were discounted at 1.5% annually. Model robustness was explored through probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and inputs varied in scenario analyses.

[RESULTS] In the base case, sotorasib was more cost-effective than adagrasib, driven by lower acquisition cost and TRAE frequency. Total discounted costs were $18,004 higher for adagrasib than sotorasib ($246,557 vs $228,553), comprising: drug acquisition ($9,478), TRAE management ($4,103) and comedications (antiemetics and antidiarrheal agents; $4,424). Sotorasib was dominant at equivalent efficacy (1.20 quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]). Net monetary benefit was $18,031 at a willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of $150,000/QALY. In the PSA, there was a higher probability of sotorasib being more cost-effective than adagrasib at all WTP thresholds (62% at a WTP of $150,000/QALY). Sotorasib was consistently more cost-effective than adagrasib in scenario analyses exploring relative efficacy, discount rate, time horizon, and utilities, with ICERs well below the $150,000/QALY WTP threshold.

[LIMITATIONS] MAIC-based comparative effectiveness was used in the absence of head-to-head trial data; conclusions informed by MAIC should be interpreted with caution; long-term projections are limited without mature OS data; published data sources may be based on different populations.

[CONCLUSION] Sotorasib was more cost-effective than adagrasib in the second- and subsequent-line treatment of G12C NSCLC, based on current efficacy and safety data.