Cost-effectiveness of adding rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for the treatment of previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia

Sensitivity Analysis in Economic Evaluations of Immuno-Oncology Drugs: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to review, assess, and report the characteristics and strategies of sensitivity analyses (SAs) that were performed in the context of published economic evaluations of immuno-oncology drugs.

METHODS

The systematic literature search was conducted in Scopus and MEDLINE for articles published from 2005 to 2021. Study selection, based on a predefined set of criteria, was performed by 2 reviewers independently. We included economic evaluations of Food and Drug Administration-approved immuno-oncology drugs that were published in English and assessed the accompanying SAs on a set of items, including the range justification of the baseline parameters within the deterministic SA, the provisions for the correlation/overlay between parameters, and the justification of the chosen parameter distribution for the probabilistic SA, among others.

RESULTS

A total of 98 of 295 publications met the inclusion criteria. A total of 90 studies included a one-way and probabilistic SA and 16 of 98 studies had one-way and scenario analysis, alone or together with probabilistic analysis. Most studies provide explicit references as to the choice of parameters and values; nevertheless, there is a lack of a reference of correlation/overlay between parameters in most of the evaluations. In 26 of 98 studies, the most influential parameter for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was the under-evaluation drug cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of included articles contained an SA that was implemented according to commonly accepted published guidance. The under-evaluation drug cost, the estimates of progression-free survival, the hazard ratio for overall survival, and the time horizon of the analysis seem to play an important part in the robustness of the outcomes.

Systematic Literature Review of Economic Evaluations of Treatment Alternatives in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

BACKGROUND

Economic evaluations are widely used to predict the economic impact of new treatment alternatives. Comprehensive economic reviews in the field of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are warranted to supplement the existing analyses focused on specific therapeutic areas.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted based on literature searches in Medline and EMBASE to summarize the published health economics models related to all types of CLL therapies. Narrative synthesis of relevant studies was performed focusing on compared treatments, patient populations, modelling approaches and key findings.

RESULTS

We included 29 studies, the majority of which were published between 2016 and 2018, when data from large clinical trials in CLL became available. Treatment regimens were compared in 25 cases, while the remaining four studies considered treatment strategies with more complex patient pathways. Based on the review results, Markov modelling with a simple structure of three health states (progression-free, progressed, death) can be considered as the traditional basis to simulate cost effectiveness. However, more recent studies added further complexity, including additional health states for different therapies (e.g. best supportive care or stem cell transplantation), for progression-free state (e.g. by differentiating between with or without treatment), or for response status (i.e. partial response and complete response).

CONCLUSIONS

As personalized medicine is increasingly gaining recognition, we expect that future economic evaluations will also incorporate new solutions, which are necessary to capture a larger number of genetic and molecular markers and more complex patient pathways with individual patient-level allocation of treatment options and thus economic assessments.

A Probabilistic Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Venetoclax and Obinutuzumab as a First-Line Therapy in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia in Canada

BACKGROUND

Venetoclax is a first-in-class targeted therapy option that is an inducer of apoptosis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) cells. The open-label phase III CLL14 clinical trial showed that venetoclax combined with obinutuzumab (VEN+O) is superior to obinutuzumab combined with chlorambucil in newly diagnosed patients with CLL. The aim of this study was to assess the health economic value of VEN+O for the frontline treatment of CLL in Canada from a publicly funded healthcare system perspective.

METHODS

A partitioned survival analyses model was developed including three health states: progression free, progressed, and death. A cycle length of 28 days and a time horizon of 10 years was assumed. VEN+O treatment for a fixed duration of 12 months was compared to obinutuzumab combined with chlorambucil, fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide plus rituximab, bendamustine plus rituximab, chlorambucil plus rituximab, ibrutinib, and acalabrutinib. The population in the model included both unfit and overall frontline CLL patients, two subgroups were also assessed (patients with del17p/TP53 mutations and patients without del17p/TP53 mutations). Survival data extrapolated from the CLL14 trial were used to populate the model. Uncertainty was assessed via one-way sensitivity analyses, probabilistic analyses, and scenario analyses.

RESULTS

Based on the probabilistic analyses, unfit frontline CLL patients receiving VEN+O were estimated to incur costs of Canadian dollars ($) 217,727 [confidence interval (CI) $170,725, $300,761] (del17p/TP53: $209,102 [CI $159,698, $386,190], non-del17p/TP53: $217,732 [CI $171,232, $299,063]) and accrue 4.96 [CI 4.04, 5.82] quality-adjusted life-years (del17p/TP53: 3.11 [CI 2.00, 4.20], non-del17p/TP53: 5.04 [CI 4.05, 5.92]). Obinutuzumab combined with chlorambucil, bendamustine plus rituximab, chlorambucil plus rituximab, and ibrutinib accrued lower quality-adjusted life-years and higher costs and as such, VEN+O was the dominant treatment option. The full incremental analysis showed that acalabrutinib was more expensive and more efficacious compared with VEN+O with an incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio of $2,139,180/quality-adjusted life-year versus VEN+O and not a cost-effective option in Canada. Probabilistic analyses show that at a willingness to pay of $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year gained, VEN+O has the greatest probability of being cost effective.

CONCLUSIONS

VEN+O is a cost-effective treatment option for unfit frontline CLL patients and provides value for money to healthcare payers.

Cost-effectiveness and drug wastage of immunotherapeutic agents for hematologic malignancies: a systematic review

Introduction: Novel immunotherapeutic agents (e.g. monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, bispecific T-cell engagers) as treatment options for hematologic malignancies continue to emerge. These agents have been used as the standard of care in specific disease states and are associated with high costs. Value assessment of these therapies is of critical importance for coverage and reimbursement decision-making.Areas covered: We identified 15 immunotherapeutic agents through the U.S. FDA approvals for hematologic malignancies until 2018 and systematically reviewed related cost-effectiveness studies. Additionally, we examined whether drug wastage was accounted for in these studies.Expert opinion: We reviewed 51 studies for 14 identified immunotherapeutic agents that met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Three studies were observational-based, one study was model-based and incorporated observational data. The remaining studies were model-based with the majority of the model parameters extracted from randomized control trials (RCTs). Among 43 model-based economic evaluations, 13 studies accounted for drug wastage. Most of the studies showed favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of immunotherapeutic agents-containing regimens when compared with no immunotherapeutic agents-containing regimens. Alemtuzumab, brentuximab vedotin, and daratumumab were not considered cost-effective across all the studies. Further investigations are warranted to establish the value of recent immunotherapeutic agents for hematologic malignancies.

Economic burden of treatment failure in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed healthcare costs of first-line treatment failure (TF) in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), a subtype of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

METHODS

Pre-diagnosis treatment-naïve adults with ≥2 CLL diagnoses initiated on an antineoplastic agent (index date) after their first CLL diagnosis with ≥12 and ≥6 months of continuous observation pre- and post-index, respectively, were selected from the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases. Patients had no solid malignancies in the pre-index period nor selected blood malignancies at any time. Initial therapy included antineoplastic agents initiated in the first 30 days post-index. TF occurred at the earliest of: initiation of a new antineoplastic agent, treatment resumption following a ≥3 month break, non-chemotherapy intervention (stem cell transplant or radiotherapy), hospice care or hospital mortality. The cost of TF was evaluated as the healthcare cost difference between patients with and without first-line TF using ordinary least square regressions adjusted for baseline characteristics. Non-parametric bootstrap was used to evaluate statistical significance.

RESULTS

Among 2226 patients identified (mean age: 68 years; female: 41%), 46% experienced first-line TF. The average TF cost was $3011 per patient per month (p < .001). When stratifying patients by event indicating TF and by most common therapies, non-chemotherapy intervention ($7582 per patient per month; p < .0001) and fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/rituximab ($4758; p < .001) were associated with the highest TF cost, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost of first-line TF is high and varies across first-line therapies. This should be considered when selecting the initial therapy in these patients.

Rituximab in B-Cell Hematologic Malignancies: A Review of 20 Years of Clinical Experience

Rituximab is a human/murine, chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with established efficacy, and a favorable and well-defined safety profile in patients with various CD20-expressing lymphoid malignancies, including indolent and aggressive forms of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Since its first approval 20 years ago, intravenously administered rituximab has revolutionized the treatment of B-cell malignancies and has become a standard component of care for follicular lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and mantle cell lymphoma. For all of these diseases, clinical trials have demonstrated that rituximab not only prolongs the time to disease progression but also extends overall survival. Efficacy benefits have also been shown in patients with marginal zone lymphoma and in more aggressive diseases such as Burkitt lymphoma. Although the proven clinical efficacy and success of rituximab has led to the development of other anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in recent years (e.g., obinutuzumab, ofatumumab, veltuzumab, and ocrelizumab), rituximab is likely to maintain a position within the therapeutic armamentarium because it is well established with a long history of successful clinical use. Furthermore, a subcutaneous formulation of the drug has been approved both in the EU and in the USA for the treatment of B-cell malignancies. Using the wealth of data published on rituximab during the last two decades, we review the preclinical development of rituximab and the clinical experience gained in the treatment of hematologic B-cell malignancies, with a focus on the well-established intravenous route of administration. This article is a companion paper to A. Davies, et al., which is also published in this issue.

FUNDING

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland.

Economic evaluation of obinutuzumab in combination with chlorambucil in first-line treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia in Spain

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of obinutuzumab in combination with chlorambucil (GClb) versus rituximab plus chlorambucil (RClb) in the treatment of adults with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and with comorbidities that make them unsuitable for full-dose fludarabine-based therapy, from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.

Methods

A Markov model was developed with three mutually exclusive health states: progression-free survival (with or without treatment), progression, and death. Survival time for the two treatments was modeled based on the results of CLL11 clinical trial and external sources. Each health state was associated with a utility value and direct medical costs. The utilities were obtained from a utility elicitation study conducted in the UK. Costs and general background mortality data were obtained from published Spanish sources. Deterministic and probabilistic analyses were conducted, with a time frame of 20 years. The health outcomes were measured as life years (LYs) gained and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Efficiency was measured as the cost per LY or per QALY gained of the most effective regimen.

Results

In the deterministic base case analysis, each patient treated with GClb resulted in 0.717 LYs gained and 0.673 QALYs gained versus RClb. The cost per LY and per QALY gained with GClb versus RClb was €23,314 and €24,838, respectively. The results proved stable in most of the univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, with a probabilistic cost per QALY gained of €24,734 (95% confidence interval: €21,860–28,367).

Conclusion

Using GClb to treat patients with previously untreated CLL for whom full-dose fludarabine-based therapy is unsuitable allows significant gains in terms of LYs and QALYs versus treatment with RClb. Treatment with GClb versus RClb can be regarded as efficient when considered the willingness to pay thresholds commonly used in Spain.

Cost Effectiveness of Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Rare Diseases: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibody (mAb)-based orphan drugs have led to advances in the treatment of diseases by selectively targeting molecule functions. However, their high treatment costs impose a substantial cost burden on patients and society.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to systematically review cost-effectiveness evidence of mAb orphan drugs.

METHODS

Ovid MEDLINE(®), EMBASE(®), and PsycINFO(®) were searched in June 2014 and articles were selected if they conducted economic evaluations of the mAb orphan drugs that had received marketing approval in the USA. The quality of the selected studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument.

RESULTS

We reviewed 16 articles that included 24 economic evaluations of nine mAb orphan drugs. Six of these nine drugs were included in cost-utility analysis studies, whereas three drugs were included in cost-effectiveness analysis studies. Previous cost-utility analysis studies revealed that four mAb orphan drugs (cetuximab, ipilimumab, rituximab, and trastuzumab) were found to be cost effective; one drug (bevacizumab) was not cost effective; and one drug (infliximab) was not consistent across the studies. Prior cost-effectiveness analysis studies which included three mAb orphan drugs (adalimumab, alemtuzumab, and basiliximab) showed that the incremental cost per effectiveness gained for these drugs ranged from $US4669 to $Can52,536 Canadian dollars. The quality of the included studies was good or fair with the exception of one study.

CONCLUSIONS

Some mAb orphan drugs were reported as cost effective under the current decision-making processes. Use of these expensive drugs, however, can raise an equity issue which concerns fairness in access to treatment. The issue of equal access to drugs needs to be considered alongside other societal values in making the final health policy decisions.

Cost-Effectiveness Model for Chemoimmunotherapy Options in Patients with Previously Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Unsuitable for Full-Dose Fludarabine-Based Therapy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody obinutuzumab plus chlorambucil (GClb) in untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia unsuitable for full-dose fludarabine-based therapy.

METHODS

A Markov model was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of GClb versus other chemoimmunotherapy options. The model comprised three mutually exclusive health states: "progression-free survival (with/without therapy)", "progression (refractory/relapsed lines)", and "death". Each state was assigned a health utility value representing patients' quality of life and a specific cost value. Comparisons between GClb and rituximab plus chlorambucil or only chlorambucil were performed using patient-level clinical trial data; other comparisons were performed via a network meta-analysis using information gathered in a systematic literature review. To support the model, a utility elicitation study was conducted from the perspective of the UK National Health Service.

RESULTS

There was good agreement between the model-predicted progression-free and overall survival and that from the CLL11 trial. On incorporating data from the indirect treatment comparisons, it was found that GClb was cost-effective with a range of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios below a threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, and remained so during deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses under various scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

GClb was estimated to increase both quality-adjusted life expectancy and treatment costs compared with several commonly used therapies, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios below commonly referenced UK thresholds. This article offers a real example of how to combine direct and indirect evidence in a cost-effectiveness analysis of oncology drugs.

Economic Burden and Quality-of-Life Effects of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most prevalent type of leukemia in the Western hemisphere. The disease affects quality of life (QOL) and poses an economic burden on patients, payers, and society. The objective of this review was to quantify the economic burden and quality-of-life effects and identify the gaps that should be addressed by future research.

METHODS

Free-text and subject heading searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination Database, and the Web of Science Core Collection database were conducted to identify observational and interventional studies reporting costs and/or quality-of-life effects published up to 2 October 2015. Studies were included irrespective of whether they were conducted prospectively or retrospectively. The focus population consisted of adult patients aged 18 years or older affected by any stage of CLL. Studies were included regardless of whether the underlying population was treated at baseline or not. Risk of bias was assessed using a quality checklist developed by the Effective Public Health Practice Project for (randomized) controlled trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies. Economic evaluations were rated using a checklist developed by Stuhldreher et al. (Int J Eat Disord 45:476-91, 2012).

RESULTS

From 2451 records identified, 27 studies were found to be eligible for inclusion. Studies were heterogeneous with respect to methodology, perspective, and data used. Annual direct costs per person ranged from US$4491 in Germany to US$43,913 in the USA. The share of costs attributable to drug treatment varied between 26.2 and 79 %. Indirect costs amounted to US$4208. Severity of disease was a predictor for quality of life, whereas differences by age and sex were mainly present in subdomains. Comparisons of treated and untreated populations resulted in an increase of quality of life in favor of treated populations in the long-term perspective. Differences between treatments were small. Consequently, cost effectiveness in decision-analytic models did not depend on whether quality of life or survival are used to describe the benefits of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the quantity and the quality of health economic and quality-of-life evidence have substantially increased, there is still a need for studies that take a patient or societal perspective. Factors that influence costs and the quality of life of patients seem to be well-established, while longitudinal lifetime cost studies at the population level are still scarce.

Adjusting for Drug Wastage in Economic Evaluations of New Therapies for Hematologic Malignancies: A Systematic Review

Purpose:

As costs of cancer care rise, there has been a shift to focus on value. Drug wastage affects costs to patients and health care systems without adding value. Historically, cost-effectiveness analyses have used models that assume no drug wastage; however, this may not reflect real-world practices. We sought to identify the frequency of drug wastage modeling in economic evaluations of modern parenteral therapies for hematologic malignancies.

Methods:

We conducted a systematic literature review of economic evaluations of new US Food and Drug Administration–approved parenteral chemotherapies with indications for the treatment of hematologic malignancies. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of studies that modeled drug wastage in base-case analyses. If wastage was considered in primary analyses, we reported the impact of wastage on incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and drug acquisition costs.

Results:

Wastage was considered in base-case analyses in less than one third of all publications reviewed (12 of 38; 32%). Of these, two studies went on to complete sensitivity analyses and reported significant changes in the calculated ICER as a result. In one study, the ICER increased by 32%, and in the second, accounting for wastage changed a positive ICER to a dominant result.

Conclusion:

Potential costs associated with drug wastage are considered in only one third of modern cost-effectiveness models. The impact of wastage on calculated ICERs and drug acquisition costs is potentially substantial. The modeling of wastage in base-case and sensitivity analyses is recommended for future economic evaluations of new intravenous therapies for hematologic malignancies.

Cost-effectiveness of rituximab in addition to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (R-FC) for the first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia

The cost-effectiveness of rituximab in combination with fludarabine/cyclophosphamide (R-FC) for the first line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) was evaluated. Based on long-term clinical data (follow-up of 5.9 years) from the CLL8-trial, a Markov-model with three health states (Free from disease progression, Progressive disease, Death) was used to evaluate the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and cost per life years gained (LYG) of R-FC from the perspective of the German statutory health insurance (SHI). The addition of rituximab to FC chemotherapy results in a gain of 1.1 quality-adjusted life-years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of R-FC compared with FC was €17,979 per QALY (€15,773 per LYG). Results were robust in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. From the German SHI perspective, rituximab in combination with FC chemotherapy represents good value for first-line treatment of patients with CLL and compares favorably with chemotherapy alone.

Cost-effectiveness of adding rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia in Ukraine

The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness, from a health care perspective, of adding rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide scheme (FCR versus FC) for treatment-naïve and refractory/relapsed Ukrainian patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. A decision-analytic Markov cohort model with three health states and 1-month cycle time was developed and run within a life time horizon. Data from two multinational, prospective, open-label Phase 3 studies were used to assess patients’ survival. While utilities were generalized from UK data, local resource utilization and disease-associated treatment, hospitalization, and side effect costs were applied. The alternative scenario was performed to assess the impact of lower life expectancy of the general population in Ukraine on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for treatment-naïve patients. One-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the results. The ICER (in US dollars) of treating chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients with FCR versus FC is US$8,704 per quality-adjusted life year gained for treatment-naïve patients and US$11,056 for refractory/relapsed patients. When survival data were modified to the lower life expectancy of the general population in Ukraine, the ICER for treatment-naïve patients was higher than US$13,000. This value is higher than three times the current gross domestic product per capita in Ukraine. Sensitivity analyses have shown a high impact of rituximab costs and a moderate impact of differences in utilities on the ICER. Furthermore, probabilistic sensitivity analyses have shown that for refractory/relapsed patients the probability of FCR being cost-effective is higher than for treatment-naïve patients and is close to one if the threshold is higher than US$15,000. State coverage of rituximab treatment may be considered a cost-effective treatment for the Ukrainian population under conditions of economic stability, cost-effectiveness threshold growth, or rituximab price negotiations.

Emerging immunological drugs for chronic lymphocytic leukemia

INTRODUCTION

Over the last few years, several new immunological drugs, particularly monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), immunomodulatory drugs and B-cell receptor (BCR) pathway inhibitors have been developed and investigated in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). This article summarizes recent discoveries regarding their mechanism of action, pharmacological properties, clinical activity and toxicity, as well as the emerging role of these agents in CLL.

AREAS COVERED

A literature review of mAbs, BCR pathway inhibitors and immunomodulating drugs was conducted of the MEDLINE database via PubMed for articles in English. Publications from 2000 through February 2015 were scrutinized. The search terms used were alemtuzumab, BI 836826, duvelisib ibrutinib, idelalisib, lenalidomide, monoclonal antibodies, MEDI-551, MOR208, obinutuzumab, ocaratuzumab, ofatumumab, ONO-4059, otlertuzumab, spebrutinib, veltuzumab and XmAb5574 in conjunction with CLL. Conference proceedings from the previous 5 years of the American Society of Hematology, European Hematology Association, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and ACR/ARHP Annual Scientific Meetings were searched manually. Additional relevant publications were obtained by reviewing the references from the chosen articles.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of mAbs, BCR inhibitors and immunomodulating drugs is a promising new strategy for chemotherapy-free treatment of CLL. However, definitive data from ongoing and future clinical trials will aid in better defining the status of immunological drugs in the treatment of this disease.

Cost-effectiveness of the sequential application of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia

Several tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are approved for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) therapy. We evaluated the long-term cost-effectiveness of seven sequential therapy regimens for CML in Austria. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a state-transition Markov model. As model parameters, we used published trial data, clinical, epidemiological and economic data from the Austrian CML registry and national databases. We performed a cohort simulation over a life-long time-horizon from a societal perspective. Nilotinib without second-line TKI yielded an incremental cost-utility ratio of 121,400 €/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) compared to imatinib without second-line TKI after imatinib failure. Imatinib followed by nilotinib after failure resulted in 131,100 €/QALY compared to nilotinib without second-line TKI. Nilotinib followed by dasatinib yielded 152,400 €/QALY compared to imatinib followed by nilotinib after failure. Remaining strategies were dominated. The sequential application of TKIs is standard-of-care, and thus, our analysis points toward imatinib followed by nilotinib as the most cost-effective strategy.

Modelling the cost effectiveness of rituximab in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in first-line therapy and following relapse

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of adding rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (R-FC) for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) has been demonstrated in two randomised trials: CLL-8 was conducted in previously untreated patients, and REACH was conducted in previously treated patients. In both trials, progression-free survival was increased in the R-FC treatment groups compared with the FC treatment groups. In CLL-8, overall survival was also significantly increased.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an economic model to assess the cost effectiveness, from the Australian healthcare perspective, of rituximab when used as a treatment for both previously untreated and relapsed/refractory CLL.

METHODS

A Markov model with three health states (unprogressed, progressed and death) was developed to extrapolate the trial results over a 15-year time horizon. A treatment algorithm was developed with Australian haematologists to inform the treatments to be modelled. The base-case compares up to three courses of six cycles of R-FC ('first-line' treatment) followed by three courses of post-progression salvage ('Salvage') treatment (including rituximab) with three courses of FC followed by three courses of Salvage treatment (excluding rituximab). Subsequent treatments are incorporated into the model by repeating the unprogressed and progressed health states for each treatment. Time-dependent transition probabilities for the model were estimated from an analysis of individual patient data from CLL-8 and REACH. Comparisons of the hazard rates for the CLL-8 and REACH trials enabled an assessment of the impact on the transitions of receiving the same regimen as the first or second treatment, and hence inform assumptions regarding transitions for third and subsequent treatments. Costs applied in the model were based on published Australian prices in 2009.

RESULTS

The model predicts patients receive an average of approximately two courses of treatment, and the addition of rituximab results in an incremental gain of 0.94 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental cost associated with the addition of rituximab is A$40,268, and hence the cost per QALY gained (QALYG) is A$42,906.

CONCLUSION

Rituximab, in combination with chemotherapy, when used multiple times throughout the treatment algorithm, appears to be cost effective for CLL from the Australian healthcare perspective, with a cost/QALYG within the range generally accepted as providing value.

Rituximab and new regimens for indolent lymphoma: a brief update from 2012 ASCO Annual Meeting

Indolent lymphoma (IL), the second most common lymphoma, remains incurable with chemotherapy alone. While R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) remains the standard frontline regimen for diffuse Large B -cell lymphoma, the optimal chemotherapy regimen for frontline therapy of advanced IL remains uncertain. FCR (fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, rituximab) has been shown to be better than fludarabine alone and fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide for IL. In FOLL05 trial, R-CHOP was compared with R-CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone) and R-FM (fludarabine, mitoxantrone). The study showed that R-CHOP appears to have the best risk-benefit ratio for IL. The StiL NHL1 trial showed that BR (bendamustine, rituximab) has longer progression free survival and is better tolerated than R-CHOP. Long-term complications with secondary malignancies between the two regimens appear to be comparable. In this review, new combination regimens reported at 2012 ASCO annual meeting were evaluated for frontline and salvage therapy of indolent lymphoma.