Using Circulating Tumor DNA to Spare Patients with DLBCL Unnecessary Treatment and Cost: A Model-Based Analysis

Introduction Despite its advantages, 18F FDG positron emission tomography (PET) can yield false positives in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), potentially putting patients at risk of overtreatment. This was seen in long-term follow-up of the GOYA trial, where >50% of patients who did not achieve complete remission on end of treatment (EOT) PET following first line chemoimmunotherapy remained alive and progression-free many years later. Similar outcomes were seen in CALGB 50303. Plasma derived circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is an emerging biomarker in DLBCL. PhasED-Seq is a ctDNA assay that requires recovery of multiple variants on the same single strand of DNA, and thereby offers improved specificity for determining true disease activity. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has improved survival in primary-refractory and early relapsed DLBCL compared to conventional salvage chemotherapy and autograft, but has substantial therapeutic and financial toxicities that warrant judicious utilization. We therefore modeled an EOT ctDNA-guided strategy for patients with DLBCL completing frontline therapy, focused on those who are EOT PET positive to reduce potential CAR-T overtreatment. Methods We used a decision tree model to compare current practice with potential future treatment algorithms that incorporate ctDNA testing to guide treatment decision making for DLBCL following completion of frontline R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone). The model was built using TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2024. The standard care paradigm includes an EOT PET, where PET-positive cases receive either empiric second line therapy, biopsy, or repeat PET scan, with biopsy positive or repeat PET positive cases receiving second line CAR-T with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel). In the intervention strategy, only patients with positive EOT PET results received ctDNA testing, using the PhasED-Seq assay based on published performance metrics. Patients with positive ctDNA results were deemed to have active DLBCL, and thus received CAR-T. PET-positive, ctDNA-negative patients were not treated unless their disease progressed. To evaluate secondary cost outcomes, we performed a cost-minimization analysis from a health system perspective to evaluate direct medical costs. The model included cost of PET scans, biopsies, CAR-T (including supportive care, hospitalizations, and associated clinic visits), and ctDNA testing. Event probabilities and cost data were derived from a combination of recent publications, conference presentations, and Medicare procedure pricing. Since pricing for ctDNA testing by PhasED-Seq is not yet available, we estimated a base case price of $5,000 per test. Results In our model, an EOT ctDNA-guided treatment strategy significantly decreased CAR-T utilization in patients with PET-positive DLBCL (from 83% to 57% of patients) and reduced overall CAR-T use (from 30% to 22% of patients). Additionally, the ctDNA strategy lowered average healthcare costs (from $139,820 to $106,273 per patient). Sensitivity analyses showed that ctDNA guided treatment reduced CAR-T utilization in almost all circumstances, except if: 1) the probability of a patient with a positive EOT PET having negative ctDNA testing was <18% (compared to 44% in clinical data); or 2) the probability of DLBCL progression within one year with PET positivity and ctDNA negativity was >61% (compared to 4% in early clinical data). Conclusions Our model suggests ctDNA testing can refine diagnostic precision in DLBCL after first-line treatment, reducing CAR-T exposure for patients unlikely to benefit based on likely false positive EOT PET, thus mitigating therapeutic harm and costs. However, the lack of large-cohort data of standardized-methodology ctDNA highlights the urgent need for clinical trials investigating measurable residual disease-adapted approaches in DLBCL to both optimize clinical outcomes and ensure efficient healthcare spending.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2024-11-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2024-207430
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.57
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Using Circulating Tumor DNA to Spare Patients with DLBCL Unnecessary Treatment and Cost: A Model-Based Analysis

David A. Russler‐Germain, Amar H. Kelkar, Edward R. Scheffer Cliff
2 citations
Blood
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
0.57
article

Using Circulating Tumor DNA to Spare Patients with DLBCL Unnecessary Treatment and Cost: A Model-Based Analysis

David A. Russler‐Germain, Amar H. Kelkar, Edward R. Scheffer Cliff
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Introduction Despite its advantages, 18F FDG positron emission tomography (PET) can yield false positives in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), potentially putting patients at risk of overtreatment. This was seen in long-term follow-up of the GOYA trial, where >50% of patients who did not achieve complete remission on end of treatment (EOT) PET following first line chemoimmunotherapy remained alive and progression-free many years later. Similar outcomes were seen in CALGB 50303. Plasma derived circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is an emerging biomarker in DLBCL. PhasED-Seq is a ctDNA assay that requires recovery of multiple variants on the same single strand of DNA, and thereby offers improved specificity for determining true disease activity. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has improved survival in primary-refractory and early relapsed DLBCL compared to conventional salvage chemotherapy and autograft, but has substantial therapeutic and financial toxicities that warrant judicious utilization. We therefore modeled an EOT ctDNA-guided strategy for patients with DLBCL completing frontline therapy, focused on those who are EOT PET positive to reduce potential CAR-T overtreatment. Methods We used a decision tree model to compare current practice with potential future treatment algorithms that incorporate ctDNA testing to guide treatment decision making for DLBCL following completion of frontline R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone). The model was built using TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2024. The standard care paradigm includes an EOT PET, where PET-positive cases receive either empiric second line therapy, biopsy, or repeat PET scan, with biopsy positive or repeat PET positive cases receiving second line CAR-T with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel). In the intervention strategy, only patients with positive EOT PET results received ctDNA testing, using the PhasED-Seq assay based on published performance metrics. Patients with positive ctDNA results were deemed to have active DLBCL, and thus received CAR-T. PET-positive, ctDNA-negative patients were not treated unless their disease progressed. To evaluate secondary cost outcomes, we performed a cost-minimization analysis from a health system perspective to evaluate direct medical costs. The model included cost of PET scans, biopsies, CAR-T (including supportive care, hospitalizations, and associated clinic visits), and ctDNA testing. Event probabilities and cost data were derived from a combination of recent publications, conference presentations, and Medicare procedure pricing. Since pricing for ctDNA testing by PhasED-Seq is not yet available, we estimated a base case price of $5,000 per test. Results In our model, an EOT ctDNA-guided treatment strategy significantly decreased CAR-T utilization in patients with PET-positive DLBCL (from 83% to 57% of patients) and reduced overall CAR-T use (from 30% to 22% of patients). Additionally, the ctDNA strategy lowered average healthcare costs (from $139,820 to $106,273 per patient). Sensitivity analyses showed that ctDNA guided treatment reduced CAR-T utilization in almost all circumstances, except if: 1) the probability of a patient with a positive EOT PET having negative ctDNA testing was <18% (compared to 44% in clinical data); or 2) the probability of DLBCL progression within one year with PET positivity and ctDNA negativity was >61% (compared to 4% in early clinical data). Conclusions Our model suggests ctDNA testing can refine diagnostic precision in DLBCL after first-line treatment, reducing CAR-T exposure for patients unlikely to benefit based on likely false positive EOT PET, thus mitigating therapeutic harm and costs. However, the lack of large-cohort data of standardized-methodology ctDNA highlights the urgent need for clinical trials investigating measurable residual disease-adapted approaches in DLBCL to both optimize clinical outcomes and ensure efficient healthcare spending.

BloodVol. 144(Supplement 1)
The Royal Melbourne Hospital (AU), Harvard University (US), The University of Melbourne (AU), Washington University in St. Louis (US), Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (AU), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
0.57
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.