Lucy Hui1, Gottfried von Keudell2, Rong Wang3,4, Amer M Zeidan2,3, Steven D Gore2,3, Xiaomei Ma3,4, Amy J Davidoff3, Scott F Huntington2,3. 1. Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Hematology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 3. Yale Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research Center, New Haven, Connecticut. 4. Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In a recent randomized, placebo-controlled trial, consolidation treatment with brentuximab vedotin (BV) decreased the risk of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) progression after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). However, the impact of BV consolidation on overall survival, quality of life, and health care costs remain unclear. METHODS: A Markov decision-analytic model was constructed to measure the costs and clinical outcomes for BV consolidation therapy compared with active surveillance in a cohort of patients aged 33 years who were at risk for HL relapse after ASCT. Life-time costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each post-ASCT strategy. RESULTS: After quality-of-life adjustments and standard discounting, upfront BV consolidation was associated with an improvement of 1.07 QALYs compared with active surveillance plus BV as salvage. However, the strategy of BV consolidation led to significantly higher health care costs ($378,832 vs $219,761), resulting in an ICER for BV consolidation compared with active surveillance of $148,664/QALY. If indication-specific pricing was implemented, then the model-estimated BV price reductions of 18% to 38% for the consolidative setting would translate into ICERs of $100,000 and $50,000 per QALY, respectively. These findings were consistent on 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: BV as consolidation therapy under current US pricing is unlikely to be cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY. However, indication-specific price reductions for the consolidative setting could reduce ICERs to widely acceptable values. Cancer 2017.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In a recent randomized, placebo-controlled trial, consolidation treatment with brentuximab vedotin (BV) decreased the risk of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) progression after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). However, the impact of BV consolidation on overall survival, quality of life, and health care costs remain unclear. METHODS: A Markov decision-analytic model was constructed to measure the costs and clinical outcomes for BV consolidation therapy compared with active surveillance in a cohort of patients aged 33 years who were at risk for HL relapse after ASCT. Life-time costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each post-ASCT strategy. RESULTS: After quality-of-life adjustments and standard discounting, upfront BV consolidation was associated with an improvement of 1.07 QALYs compared with active surveillance plus BV as salvage. However, the strategy of BV consolidation led to significantly higher health care costs ($378,832 vs $219,761), resulting in an ICER for BV consolidation compared with active surveillance of $148,664/QALY. If indication-specific pricing was implemented, then the model-estimated BV price reductions of 18% to 38% for the consolidative setting would translate into ICERs of $100,000 and $50,000 per QALY, respectively. These findings were consistent on 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: BV as consolidation therapy under current US pricing is unlikely to be cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY. However, indication-specific price reductions for the consolidative setting could reduce ICERs to widely acceptable values. Cancer 2017.
Authors: Daniel A Goldstein; Qiushi Chen; Turgay Ayer; David H Howard; Joseph Lipscomb; Bassel F El-Rayes; Christopher R Flowers Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-02-17 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Daniel A Goldstein; Bilal B Ahmad; Qiushi Chen; Turgay Ayer; David H Howard; Joseph Lipscomb; Bassel F El-Rayes; Christopher R Flowers Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-08-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Peter J Hoskin; Lisa Lowry; Alan Horwich; Andrew Jack; Ben Mead; Barry W Hancock; Paul Smith; Wendi Qian; Philippa Patrick; Bilyana Popova; Andrew Pettitt; David Cunningham; Ruth Pettengell; John Sweetenham; David Linch; Peter W M Johnson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-09-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Anas Younes; Armando Santoro; Margaret Shipp; Pier Luigi Zinzani; John M Timmerman; Stephen Ansell; Philippe Armand; Michelle Fanale; Voravit Ratanatharathorn; John Kuruvilla; Jonathon B Cohen; Graham Collins; Kerry J Savage; Marek Trneny; Kazunobu Kato; Benedetto Farsaci; Susan M Parker; Scott Rodig; Margaretha G M Roemer; Azra H Ligon; Andreas Engert Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2016-07-20 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Gursharan K Sohi; Jordan Levy; Victoria Delibasic; Laura E Davis; Alyson L Mahar; Elmira Amirazodi; Craig C Earle; Julie Hallet; Ahmed Hammad; Rajan Shah; Nicole Mittmann; Natalie G Coburn Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2021-03-09
Authors: Scott F Huntington; Gottfried von Keudell; Amy J Davidoff; Cary P Gross; Sapna A Prasad Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Abraham S Kanate; Ambuj Kumar; Peter Dreger; Martin Dreyling; Steven Le Gouill; Paolo Corradini; Chris Bredeson; Timothy S Fenske; Sonali M Smith; Anna Sureda; Alison Moskowitz; Jonathan W Friedberg; David J Inwards; Alex F Herrera; Mohamed A Kharfan-Dabaja; Nishitha Reddy; Silvia Montoto; Stephen P Robinson; Syed A Abutalib; Christian Gisselbrecht; Julie Vose; Ajay Gopal; Mazyar Shadman; Miguel-Angel Perales; Paul Carpenter; Bipin N Savani; Mehdi Hamadani Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Francesco Merli; Filippo Ballerini; Barbara Botto; Manuel Gotti; Vincenzo Pavone; Alessandro Pulsoni; Pietro Maria Stefani; Fulvio Massaro; Simonetta Viviani Journal: Acta Biomed Date: 2020-05-25