Wang, Daniel Y.

ABSTRACT Iron deficiency (ID) is a top five leading cause of disability‐adjusted life‐years in women of reproductive age around the world. Despite its enormous health burden, no screening guidelines exist for the detection and treatment of ID in women of reproductive age. We sought to determine the cost‐effectiveness of screening versus no screening for ID in women of reproductive age in the United States. A lifetime simulation of women of reproductive age was conducted using a Markov cohort model under three strategies: (1) no screening, (2) screening at a ferritin threshold of 15 μg/L, and (3) screening at a ferritin threshold of 25 μg/L, from the US health system perspective, and at a willingness‐to‐pay threshold of $100 000/quality‐adjusted life year (QALY). Epidemiologically informed ID prevalence estimates sourced from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were employed for model parameterization. The primary outcome was the incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER, in $/QALY). Base‐case results for the three strategies accrued $209 700, $210 200, and $210 200 discounted lifetime costs and 23.6, 24.0, and 24.4 discounted lifetime QALYs, respectively. Screening at a ferritin threshold of 25 μg/L was the cost‐effective intervention with an ICER of $680/QALY (95% credible interval $350–$750/QALY). In dual base‐case analyses examining intravenous rather than oral iron repletion for treatment, screening at a ferritin threshold of 25 μg/L remained the cost‐effective intervention with an ICER of $2300/QALY (95% CI $1800–$3800/QALY). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, screening at a ferritin threshold of 25 μg/L was the cost‐effective intervention in 100% of 10 000 second order Monte Carlo iterations.

Abstract Anti–PD-1 therapy has improved clinical outcomes in advanced melanoma, but most patients experience intrinsic resistance. Responding patients can develop acquired resistance to anti–PD-1. We retrospectively reviewed 488 patients treated with anti–PD-1 from three academic centers and identified 36 patients with acquired resistance, defined as disease progression following objective response. The incidence, timing, disease sites, post-progression survival (PPS), and outcomes were evaluated descriptively. The acquired resistance cohort consisted of 67% with more than 1 feature of poor prognosis (stage M1c, elevated LDH, or brain metastasis), and 67% had previously received ipilimumab. Partial and complete responses were achieved in 89% (n = 32) and 11% (n = 4) of patients, respectively, and median time to resistance (progression-free survival; PFS) was 11.1 months (range 4.3–32.8 months). Most progression was isolated (78% of patients, n = 28) and occurred while receiving therapy (78%, n = 28). The median PPS was 12.8 months (range 0.1–51.8 months), and the median overall survival was 33.7 months. Among isolated progressors, 15 received localized therapy (12 with surgery, 3 with radiation). Patients with isolated versus systemic progression exhibited a trend for improved PPS (P = 0.081), and patients with an initial PFS ≥ 15 months showed significant PPS improvement (P = 0.036). Two patients experienced subsequent responses to anti–PD-1 resumption. In conclusion, acquired resistance to anti–PD-1 was frequently associated with excellent clinical outcomes and often presented as isolated progression amenable to localized therapy (surgery or radiation) or systemic progression sensitive to therapy resumption. Cancer Immunol Res; 5(5); 357–62. ©2017 AACR.