Cost-effectiveness of Lutetium [177Lu] oxodotreotide versus best supportive care with octreotide in patients with midgut neuroendocrine tumors in France

<b>Background and Aims:</b> In France, there are approximately 2,400 new cases of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) annually. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy with ¹⁷⁷Lu-Dotatate plus long-acting repeatable [LAR] octreotide 30 mg has been shown to significantly improve progression-free survival and overall survival relative to high-dose octreotide LAR 60 mg in patients with unresectable or metastatic progressive midgut NETs. A long-term cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to assess whether ¹⁷⁷Lu-Dotatate is a cost-effective option versus octreotide 60 mg for patients with unresectable/metastatic progressive midgut NETs from the perspective of French healthcare payer. <b>Methods:</b> The analysis was performed using a three-state partitioned survival model. In the base case analysis ¹⁷⁷Lu-Dotatate plus octreotide LAR 30 mg was compared with high-dose octreotide LAR 60 mg in patients with midgut NETs. Survival data were obtained from the phase III NETTER-1 trial in patients with metastatic midgut NETs. Future costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 4% <i>per annum</i>. One-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. <b>Results:</b> In the base case analysis for patients with midgut NETs, ¹⁷⁷Lu-Dotatate treatment improved quality-adjusted life expectancy by 1.21 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) relative to octreotide LAR 60 mg and the lifetime treatment costs were EUR 50,784 higher with ¹⁷⁷Lu-Dotatate resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of EUR 42,106 per QALY gained versus octreotide LAR 60 mg. When compared with everolimus, ¹⁷⁷Lu-Dotatate was associated with an ICER of EUR 59,769 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses showed that the results were sensitive to methods used to extrapolate survival data. <b>Conclusions:</b> For patients with advanced progressive midgut NETs ¹⁷⁷Lu-Dotatate is likely to be considered a cost-effective option versus octreotide 60 mg from the perspective of the French healthcare payer.