본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Cost-effectiveness analysis of lorlatinib as first-line treatment for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer in Italy.

Journal of medical economics 2026 Vol.29(1) p. 1372-1386

Valentini I, Rumi F, Di Brino E, Bearz A, Pasello G, Novelli G, Di Virgilio R, Basile M

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

[BACKGROUND] Lorlatinib is a third-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with high central nervous system penetration and activity against resistance mutations.

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • 연구 설계 meta-analysis

이 논문을 인용하기

BibTeX ↓ RIS ↓
APA Valentini I, Rumi F, et al. (2026). Cost-effectiveness analysis of lorlatinib as first-line treatment for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer in Italy.. Journal of medical economics, 29(1), 1372-1386. https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2026.2658451
MLA Valentini I, et al.. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of lorlatinib as first-line treatment for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer in Italy.." Journal of medical economics, vol. 29, no. 1, 2026, pp. 1372-1386.
PMID 42043888

Abstract

[BACKGROUND] Lorlatinib is a third-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with high central nervous system penetration and activity against resistance mutations. Although its clinical efficacy as first-line treatment for ALK-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been demonstrated, its economic value within the Italian healthcare system remains to be fully established. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of lorlatinib compared with alectinib as first-line therapy in Italy.

[METHODS] A partitioned survival model with three health states (progression-free, progressed disease, and death) was developed from the Italian National Health Service and societal perspectives over a 30-year time horizon. Clinical efficacy inputs were derived from the CROWN trial and indirect treatment comparisons using network meta-analysis. Costs (2026 euros) included drug acquisition, subsequent treatments, healthcare resource use, adverse events, end-of-life care, and societal costs. Health outcomes were expressed as life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Deterministic, probabilistic, and scenario analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty.

[RESULTS] In the base case, lorlatinib was dominant over alectinib, providing higher benefits (+2.01 LYs; +1.66 QALYs) at lower costs (-€19,210 per patient). This finding was robust across pricing scenarios. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed an almost 98,40% probability of cost-effectiveness at Italian willingness-to-pay thresholds.

[CONCLUSIONS] From both NHS and societal perspectives, lorlatinib represents a cost-saving and clinically superior first-line treatment option compared with alectinib for patients with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC in Italy.

MeSH Terms

Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Italy; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase; Lactams; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Lung Neoplasms; Lactams, Macrocyclic; Aminopyridines; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Carbazoles; Antineoplastic Agents; Male; Cost-Effectiveness Analysis; Pyrazoles