OBJECTIVES: Mifamurtide is an immune macrophage stimulant that when added to standard chemotherapy has demonstrated survival benefit for newly diagnosed osteosarcoma. The objectives of this study were to investigate the cost-effectiveness of adding mifamurtide to standard three- or four-agent chemotherapy for high-grade, resectable, nonmetastatic osteosarcoma following surgical resection and the issues of obtaining robust cost-effectiveness estimates for ultra-orphan drugs, given the shortage of data. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service as part of the manufacturer's submission to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The disease process was simplified to a transition through a series of health states, modeled by using a Markov approach. Data to inform the model were derived from patient-level data of Study INT-0133, published literature, and expert opinion. The final efficacy measure was life-years gained (LYG), and utilities were used to obtain quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: For a 60-year time frame and a discount rate of 3.5% for outcomes, patients receiving mifamurtide benefited from an average additional 1.57 years of life and 1.34 QALYs, compared with patients receiving chemotherapy alone, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £58,737 per LYG and £68,734 per QALY. Because treatment effects were both substantial in restoring health and sustained over a very long period, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence changed its guidance to allow a discount of 1.5% for outcomes to be applied in these special circumstances. By using this discount factor, it was found that patients receiving mifamurtide had an average additional 2.58 years of life and 2.20 QALYs compared with patients receiving chemotherapy alone, resulting in an ICER of £35,765 per LYG and £41,933 per QALY. CONCLUSION: Mifamurtide's ICER is cost-effective compared with that of other orphan and ultra-orphan drugs, for which prices and corresponding cost-effectiveness estimates are high.
OBJECTIVES:Mifamurtide is an immune macrophage stimulant that when added to standard chemotherapy has demonstrated survival benefit for newly diagnosed osteosarcoma. The objectives of this study were to investigate the cost-effectiveness of adding mifamurtide to standard three- or four-agent chemotherapy for high-grade, resectable, nonmetastatic osteosarcoma following surgical resection and the issues of obtaining robust cost-effectiveness estimates for ultra-orphan drugs, given the shortage of data. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service as part of the manufacturer's submission to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The disease process was simplified to a transition through a series of health states, modeled by using a Markov approach. Data to inform the model were derived from patient-level data of Study INT-0133, published literature, and expert opinion. The final efficacy measure was life-years gained (LYG), and utilities were used to obtain quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: For a 60-year time frame and a discount rate of 3.5% for outcomes, patients receiving mifamurtide benefited from an average additional 1.57 years of life and 1.34 QALYs, compared with patients receiving chemotherapy alone, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £58,737 per LYG and £68,734 per QALY. Because treatment effects were both substantial in restoring health and sustained over a very long period, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence changed its guidance to allow a discount of 1.5% for outcomes to be applied in these special circumstances. By using this discount factor, it was found that patients receiving mifamurtide had an average additional 2.58 years of life and 2.20 QALYs compared with patients receiving chemotherapy alone, resulting in an ICER of £35,765 per LYG and £41,933 per QALY. CONCLUSION:Mifamurtide's ICER is cost-effective compared with that of other orphan and ultra-orphan drugs, for which prices and corresponding cost-effectiveness estimates are high.
Authors: Christopher J Cadham; Marie Knoll; Luz María Sánchez-Romero; K Michael Cummings; Clifford E Douglas; Alex Liber; David Mendez; Rafael Meza; Ritesh Mistry; Aylin Sertkaya; Nargiz Travis; David T Levy Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2021-10-25 Impact factor: 2.749