Table 2_Cost-effectiveness of HLX01 (Hanlikang®) vs. rituximab combined with CHOP in treatment-naive diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma: a partitioned survival model analysis.docx

BackgroundThis study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of Hanlikang (HLX01), a biosimilar of rituximab, compared to rituximab (MabThera), both combined with the cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) regimen, for treatment-naive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients. With biosimilars becoming more prominent in oncology, understanding their economic impact is crucial for optimizing treatment strategies and healthcare resource allocation.
MethodsA partitioned survival model was built using data from the HLX01-NHL03 trial, analyzing clinical outcomes in three health states—progression-free survival, progressive disease, and terminal state—over a 10-year time horizon. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were compared across transplant-eligible and non-transplant-eligible patient subgroups. Sensitivity analyses were performed to confirm the robustness of the model.
ResultsOver 10 years, Hanlikang-CHOP (H-CHOP) patients gained 7.11 QALYs, compared to 6.50 QALYs for Rituximab-CHOP (R-CHOP). The ICER for transplant-eligible patients ranged from US$ 36,386.92 (CNY 263,215.70) to US$ 38,379.79 (CNY 277,631.72) per QALY, depending on the treatment. In non-transplant-eligible patients, the ICER was between US$ 7,079.15 (CNY 51,209.16) and US$ 17,094.61 (CNY 123,658.99) per QALY. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy significantly increased the ICER to US$ 356,793.77 (CNY 2,580,974.77). Sensitivity analyses confirmed survival duration and drug costs as key factors.
ConclusionHanlikang offers a cost-effective alternative to rituximab in specific patient populations, particularly those not eligible for transplant. However, its economic benefits diminish in more complex treatment scenarios, such as those involving CAR-T therapy or novel agents.