Author:
Campioni M.,Agirrezabal I.,Hajek R.,Minarik J.,Pour L.,Spicka I.,Gonzalez-McQuire S.,Jandova P.,Maisnar V.
Abstract
Abstract
Objective
To predict the real-world (RW) cost-effectiveness of carfilzomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) patients after one to three prior therapies.
Methods
A partitioned survival model that included three health states (progression-free, progressed disease and death) was built. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and time to discontinuation (TTD) data for the Rd arm were derived using the Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies in the Czech Republic; the relative treatment effects of KRd versus Rd were estimated from the phase 3, randomised, ASPIRE trial, and were used to predict PFS, OS and TTD for KRd. The model was developed from the payer perspective and included drug costs, administration costs, monitoring costs, palliative care costs and adverse-event related costs collected from Czech sources.
Results
The base case incremental cost effectiveness ratio for KRd compared with Rd was €73,156 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Patients on KRd incurred costs of €117,534 over their lifetime compared with €53,165 for patients on Rd. The QALYs gained were 2.63 and 1.75 for patients on KRd and Rd, respectively.
Conclusions
Combining the strengths of randomised controlled trials and observational databases in cost-effectiveness models can generate policy-relevant results to allow well-informed decision-making. The current model showed that KRd is likely to be cost-effective versus Rd in the RW and, therefore, the reimbursement of KRd represents an efficient allocation of resources within the healthcare system.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
Reference62 articles.
1. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO): Multiple Myeloma: Statistics.
https://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/multiple-myeloma/statistics
(2016). Accessed 22 Nov 2017
2. Barlogie, B., Mitchell, A., van Rhee, F., Epstein, J., Morgan, G.J., Crowley, J.: Curing myeloma at last: defining criteria and providing the evidence. Blood 124(20), 3043–3051 (2014).
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2014-07-552059
3. Ferlay, J., Soerjomataram, I., Dikshit, R., Eser, S., Mathers, C., Rebelo, M., Parkin, D.M., Forman, D., Bray, F.: Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int. J. Cancer 136(5), E359–E386 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.29210
4. Laudicella, M., Walsh, B., Burns, E., Smith, P.C.: Cost of care for cancer patients in England: evidence from population-based patient-level data. Br. J. Cancer 114(11), 1286–1292 (2016).
https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2016.77
5. National Cancer Institute’s Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Cancer Stat Facts: Myeloma.
https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/mulmy.html