Reimbursement Risk Assessment

Epcoritamab treating relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after 2 or more systemic treatments

Oncology

Please enter your work email

Related Reimbursement Risk Assessments

Primary Risk Drivers

Below is a snapshot of domains that materially influence the MARA Rating. 

Clinical effectiveness

Epcoritamab has not been directly compared with standard treatments in clinical trials. An indirect comparison suggests that it may provide longer survival than rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy, but the results are uncertain. The lack of direct evidence and reliance on indirect comparisons limits the strength of the clinical effectiveness claim.

Cost effectiveness

The cost-effectiveness estimates for epcoritamab compared to standard treatments are within acceptable ranges for Healthcare resources. The committee concluded that it is cost-effective compared to R-based CIT and axicabtagene ciloleucel, although it is more expensive than polatuzumab-BR.

Quality of life

The evidence suggests that epcoritamab can improve quality of life for patients with DLBCL, particularly due to its outpatient administration and reduced hospital time compared to traditional therapies. However, specific HRQoL data from validated instruments is not extensively detailed in the document.

Supporting Domains

Safety and Adverse Effects

Epcoritamab is reported to have a good safety profile with manageable adverse effects, particularly when compared to traditional chemotherapy regimens. The document indicates that it is easier to administer and has fewer hospital visits, which contributes positively to its safety profile.

Comparator Selection

The comparators used in the evaluation include relevant treatments like rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy and axicabtagene ciloleucel. However, the lack of direct comparisons and the reliance on indirect evidence raises concerns about the robustness of the comparator selection.

Patient Population and Subgroups

The trial population for epcoritamab is considered broadly representative of the intended patient population, with clinical experts indicating that most patients eligible for epcoritamab would have ECOG scores of 0 to 2. Some concerns about the inclusion of higher ECOG scores were noted, but overall, the population is deemed appropriate.

Care Pathway Integration

Epcoritamab can be integrated into existing care pathways with minimal disruption, as it can be administered in outpatient settings without the need for intensive hospital resources. This facilitates easier access for patients compared to CAR-T therapies.

Resource Use and Cost Implications

The resource implications of using epcoritamab are manageable, with the potential for cost savings due to reduced hospital visits and outpatient administration. The economic model suggests that the budget impact is justifiable given the expected health outcomes.

Evidence Quality and Robustness

The evidence base relies on a single-arm trial and indirect comparisons, which introduces uncertainty and potential biases. While the evidence is promising, the lack of direct comparative trials limits the robustness of the findings.

Uncertainty, Sensitivity, and Broader Impacts

There are significant uncertainties regarding the indirect comparisons and the applicability of trial results to the broader patient population. The committee noted various factors that could impact the cost-effectiveness estimates, indicating a need for cautious interpretation.
Full Legal Disclaimer and Usage Terms

The MARA Rating® is an independent opinion of a drug’s market access pharma risk profile and is provided for informational purposes only—not as investment, medical, legal or any other type of advice. See our full disclaimer here.