scholarly journals Cost effectiveness of outpatient lumbar discectomy

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Linhares ◽  
João A. Fonseca ◽  
Manuel Ribeiro da Silva ◽  
Filipe Conceição ◽  
António Sousa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Economic Study ◽  
Hospital Perspective ◽  
Similar Clinical Outcome ◽  
Lumbar Microdiscectomy ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Inpatient Procedure

Abstract Background Microdiscectomy is the most commonly performed spine surgery and the first transitioning for outpatient settings. However, this transition was never studied, in what comes to cost-utility assessment. Accordingly, this economic study aims to access the cost-effectiveness of outpatient lumbar microdiscectomy when compared with the inpatient procedure. Methods This is a cost utility study, adopting the hospital perspective. Direct medical costs were retrieved from the assessment of 20 patients undergoing outpatient lumbar microdiscectomy and 20 undergoing inpatient lumbar microdiscectomy Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated from Oswestry Disability Index values (ODI). ODI was prospectively assessed in outpatients in pre and 3- and 6-month post-operative evaluations. Inpatient ODI data were estimated from a meta-analysis. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) calculated. Results Outpatient procedure was cost-saving in all models tested. At 3-month assessment ICER ranged from €135,753 to €345,755/QALY, higher than the predefined threshold of €60,000/QALY gained. At 6-month costs were lower and utilities were higher in outpatient, overpowering the inpatient procedure. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that in 65% to 73% of simulations outpatient was the better option. The savings with outpatient were about 55% of inpatient values, with similar utility scores. No 30-day readmissions were recorded in either group. Conclusion This is the first economic study on cost-effectiveness of outpatient lumbar microdiscectomy, showing a significant reduction in costs, with a similar clinical outcome, proving it cost-effective.

Is concurrent intravenous alteplase in patients undergoing endovascular treatment for large vessel occlusion stroke cost-effective even if the cost of alteplase is only US$1?

2021 ◽  
pp. neurintsurg-2021-017817
Author(s):  
Johanna Maria Ospel ◽  
Rosalie McDonough ◽  
Wolfgang G Kunz ◽  
Mayank Goyal
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Societal Perspective ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Large Vessel ◽  
Large Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Healthcare Perspective ◽  
Life Years

BackgroundThe added value of intravenous (IV) alteplase in large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke over and beyond endovascular treatment (EVT) is controversial. We compared the long-term costs and cost-effectiveness of a direct-to-EVT paradigm in LVO stroke patients presenting directly to the mothership hospital to concurrent EVT and IV alteplase.MethodsWe used a decision model consisting of a short-run model to analyze costs and functional outcomes within 90 days after the index stroke and a long-run Markov state transition model (cycle length of 12 months) to estimate expected lifetime costs and outcomes. Outcome data were from the DIRECT-MT trial (NCT03469206). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and net monetary benefits were calculated and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Analysis was performed from a healthcare perspective and a societal perspective using both a minimal assumed alteplase cost of US$1 and true alteplase cost.ResultsWhen assuming a minimal cost of alteplase of $1, EVT with concurrent IV alteplase resulted in incremental lifetime cost of $5664 (healthcare perspective)/$4804 (societal perspective) and a decrement of 0.25 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with EVT only, indicating dominance of the EVT only approach. Net monetary benefits were consistently higher for EVT only compared with EVT with concurrent alteplase. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed increased costs without an increase in QALYs for EVT and concurrent IV alteplase compared with EVT only. Results were even more in favor of EVT when the true cost of alteplase was used for analysis.ConclusionEVT without concurrent alteplase is the preferred strategy from a health economic standpoint.

Cost-effectiveness of darbepoetin alfa (DA) 500 mcg every three weeks (Q3W) with IV iron compared to DA Q3W alone in cancer patients (pts) with chemotherapy-induced anaemia (CIA)

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 19531-19531 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Demarteau ◽  
L. Annemans ◽  
T. Mossman ◽  
A. Bracco
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Hourly Wage ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Medical Resources ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Iv Iron

19531 Background: IV iron supplementation during erythropoiesis-stimulating agent treatment in anaemic cancer pts may help to optimize anaemia management. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of DA Q3W with IV iron (net 200 mg Q3W; DA+IV iron) to DA Q3W without IV iron (standard practice [SP]= oral iron allowed; DA+SP) from a French societal perspective. Methods: A prospective 16-week, randomized, open-label, multicenter study in 396 pts with non-myeloid malignancy and CIA (hemoglobin [Hb] < 11g/dL) was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DA+IV iron vs. DA+SP. Data collected include: cumulative doses (IV iron, oral iron, and DA), number of transfusions, and Hb values. Quality adjusted life years (QALY) weights were obtained using the EQ-5D at baseline and at end of treatment. The medical resources used for one DA administration and one transfusion, including pts’ time, were determined by a panel of 20 French clinical experts. Costs were applied to both time (valued at the gross hourly wage) and medical resources (extracted from official sources: AMELI; INSEE). Effectiveness was expressed in average Hb values over the treatment period and the change from baseline in QALY weights. A 5,000- replication probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed with RISK® after applying distributions to medical resources used and effectiveness parameters. Results: Compared to DA+SP, DA+IV iron showed higher average Hb values (+0.2 g/dL [95% CI: -0.0, 0.4]; 10.9g/dL [10.8, 11.1] vs. 11.1g/dL [11.0, 11.3] respectively), higher QALY weights (+0.017 [-0.028, 0.064]; 0.016 [-0.019, 0.050] vs. 0.033 [0.002, 0.064]) and lower cost (-647.5€ [-938.0, -352.4]; 4,788.3€ [4,561.2, 5,018.2] vs. 4,140.8€ [3,955.4, 4,319.8]). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that DA+IV iron had a 94% chance of a higher average Hb value and lower costs and 73% chance of a higher QALY level and lower costs. Conclusions: DA Q3W with IV iron is a cost effective alternative to Q3W without IV iron. Further studies in this patient population are needed to determine whether systematic administration of IV iron with DA Q3W will demonstrate cost savings, higher average Hb values, and more QALYs. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of a self-management and comprehensive training intervention in patients with type 2 diabetes up to 5 years of diagnosis in a specialized hospital in Mexico City

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e002097
Author(s):  
Sergio Hernández-Jiménez ◽  
Ana Cristina García-Ulloa ◽  
Pablo Anaya ◽  
Ricardo Gasca-Pineda ◽  
Luis Arturo Sánchez-Trujillo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Usual Treatment ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Public Health Institutions ◽  
Health Institutions ◽  
The Cost

IntroductionTo assess the cost-effectiveness of a multidisciplinary and comprehensive innovative diabetes care program (CAIPaDi) versus usual treatment in public health institutions.Research design and methodsUsing a cost-effectiveness analysis, we compared the CAIPaDi program versus usual treatment given in Mexican public health institutions. The analysis was based on the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model, a validated simulation model used to estimate long-term clinical outcomes. Data were prospectively obtained from the CAIPaDi program and from public databases and published papers. Health outcomes were expressed in terms of life-years gained and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health and economic outcomes were estimated from a public perspective and discounted at 5% per year over a 20-year horizon. Costs are reported in US dollars (US$) of 2019. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed using life-years gained and QALYs.ResultsThe CAIPaDi costs on average US$559 (95% CI: −$879 to −$239) less than the usual treatment (95% CI: −$879 to −$239) and produced a difference in mean life-years gained (0.48, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.52) and mean QALYs (1.43, 95% CI: 1.40 to 1.46). The cost-effectiveness ratio resulted in a saving per life-year gained of −US$1155 (95% CI: −$1962 to −$460). Mean differences in QALYs resulted in a saving per QALY of −US$735 (95% CI: −$1193 to −$305). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis proved the results are robust on both life-years gained and QALYs.ConclusionsCAIPaDi has a better cost-effectiveness ratio than the usual therapy in Mexican public health institutions.

scholarly journals Cost-utility analysis of olanzapine in four-drug antiemetic therapy in Japanese patients treated with highly emetogenic cisplatin-containing chemotherapy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Kondo ◽  
Tomoya Tachi ◽  
Takayoshi Sakakibara ◽  
Jun Kato ◽  
Takahito Mizuno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Antiemetic Therapy ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Purpose Olanzapine has been shown to have an additive effect on the three-drug antiemetic therapy, consisting of aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone, in a highly emetogenic cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. Although olanzapine may be more economical than aprepitant or palonosetron, an adequate cost-efficacy analysis has not been conducted. We conducted a cost-utility analysis to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of olanzapine in four-drug antiemetic therapy among Japanese patients.Methods We simulated model patients treated with highly emetogenic cisplatin-containing chemotherapy and developed a decision-analytical model of patients receiving triple antiemetic therapy with or without olanzapine. The cost, probabilities, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of each treatment were calculated from the perspective of the Japanese healthcare payer. The threshold ICER was set at 45,867 United States dollars (USD) (5 million Japanese yen) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The probabilities, utility value, and other costs were obtained from published sources. The robustness of this model was validated by one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.Results The calculated ICER was 5,156 USD/QALY, which was below the threshold. Under the set conditions, the probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed a 100% probability that olanzapine was cost-effective. Based on the one-way sensitivity analysis, reducing the cost of olanzapine below 10.78 USD placed the ICER below the threshold. Conclusion Olanzapine was cost-effective in the four-drug antiemetic therapy for Japanese patients treated with highly emetogenic cisplatin-containing chemotherapy

PP64 Economic Evaluation For Esophageal Cancer Screening In China

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 49-49
Author(s):  
Yuanyuan Li ◽  
Lingbin Du ◽  
Xiaoqian Hu ◽  
Shuyan Gu ◽  
Xuemei Zhen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Cohort Analysis ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Life Years

IntroductionThe aim of the study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of esophageal cancer (EC) screening compared to non-screening in China.MethodsA Markov model was conducted that followed the history of EC. Screening strategies targeted a population aged 40-69 years, classified into six age groups. Each age group had three cohorts: screening without follow-up, screening with yearly follow-up for low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN), and non-screening. Life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) presented the effectiveness and utility. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were evaluating indicators. Eighteen cohorts from 100,000 hypothetical individuals were used to run the model, until aged 79 years or death. Costs were changed into USD using the purchasing power parity of 3.506 in 2017. The willingness-to-pay was set as three times the gross domestic product per capita (USD 51,340.6) in 2017. A sensitivity analysis was introduced to assess model robustness.ResultsScreening with follow-up compared to non-screening, ages 40-44, 45-49, and 50-54 years, showed cost-effectiveness, with one LY gained costing USD 6,875.0, USD 9,204.6, and USD 25,278.6, respectively. Ages 40-44 and 45-49 years explained cost-utility, with ICURs of USD 6,709.4/QALY and USD 13,991.4/QALY, respectively. Screening without follow-up compared to non-screening, ages 40-54 years, addressed cost-effectiveness, with one LY gained costing USD 6,934.8, USD 9,760.0, and USD 35,126.0 in ages 40-44, 45-49, and 50-54 years, respectively; the 40-44 years age group demonstrated cost-utility with an ICUR of USD 8,512.3/QALY. Screening with follow-up compared to screening without follow-up, all ages, explained cost-effectiveness and cost-utility. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis supported the outcome of the base cohort analysis.ConclusionsCompared to non-screening, screening with follow-up targeting ages 40-54 years was highly recommended with the ICER as the evaluated indicator, whereas it targeting ages 40-49 years was suggested with the ICUR as indicator.

Cost-effectiveness of upper extremity dry needling in the rehabilitation of patients with stroke

2021 ◽  
pp. 096452842110557
Author(s):  
Daniel Fernández Sanchis ◽  
Juan Nicolás Cuenca Zaldívar ◽  
Sandra Calvo ◽  
Pablo Herrero ◽  
Manuel Gómez Barrera
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Dry Needling ◽  
Levels Of Care ◽  
Life Years

Introduction: Dry needling (DN) has been shown to be effective for the treatment of upper extremity hypertonia in patients with stroke. Purpose: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DN in patients with stroke. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed in a research study conducted at a Spanish public hospital where patients were classified into two groups with or without DN. Hypertonia was measured using the Modified Modified Ashworth Scale (MMAS), and quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the EuroQoL 5-dimension questionnaire. Data regarding the effects and costs of physiotherapy were presented by calculating the mean and 95% confidence interval. The health outcomes were evaluated considering the rate of responders to the treatment based on the MMAS. Spanish preference weights were used to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were calculated to determine the economic value of DN. Results: Eighty patients with stroke in the subacute stage of recovery were selected to participate in this study. Based on the rate of responders, the ICER of the DN group was very low. Despite the sensitivity analysis performed, the results of the ICUR were not encouraging. Discussion: Cost-effectiveness with responder rate results were favourable for the DN group and were confirmed by the sensitivity analysis according to levels of care. In addition, our findings revealed that 4 weeks of treatment could be more cost-effective than 8 weeks. DN treatment of the upper extremity appears to be cost-effective based on the rate of responders measured using the MMAS scale.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for treatment of platinum-resistant recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in China: an economic analysis based on a randomised, open-label, phase III trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e038867 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenxiu Xin ◽  
Haiying Ding ◽  
Qilu Fang ◽  
Xiaowei Zheng ◽  
Yinghui Tong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Platinum Resistant ◽  
The Cost

BackgroundPembrolizumab was recently demonstrated to have survival benefit in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (r/mHNSCC). However, the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in China remains uncertain.ObjectiveThis analysis aimed to describe the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus standard-of-care (SOC) therapy in r/mHNSCC in China.DesignA Markov model consisting of three health states (stable, progressive and dead) was developed to compare the cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab with SOC in platinum-resistant r/mHNSCC. Model inputs for transition probabilities and toxicity were collected from the KEYNOTE-040 trial, while health utilities were estimated from a literature review. Cost data were acquired for the payer’s perspective in China. Costs and outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 3.0%. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the uncertainties surrounding model parameters.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), which were calculated as the cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).ResultsThe total mean cost of pembrolizumab and SOC was US$45 861 and US$41 950, respectively. As for effectiveness, pembrolizumab yielded 0.31 QALYs compared with 0.25 QALYs for SOC therapy. The ICER for pembrolizumab versus SOC was US$65 186/QALY, which was higher than the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of US$28 130/QALY in China. The univariate sensitivity analysis indicated that utility values for progressive state, probability from stable to progressive in the SOC group, as well as cost of pembrolizumab were the three most influential variables on ICER. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that standard therapy was more likely to be cost-effective compared with pembrolizumab at a WTP value of US$28 130/QALY. Results were robust across both univariate analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.ConclusionsPembrolizumab is not likely to be a cost-effective strategy compared with SOC therapy in patients with platinum-resistant r/mHNSCC in China.Trial registration numberNCT02252042; Post-results.

scholarly journals Economic evaluation of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared to open radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer treatment in Ontario, Canada

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Parackal ◽  
Jean-Eric Tarride ◽  
Feng Xie ◽  
Gord Blackhouse ◽  
Jennifer Hoogenes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Time Horizon ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Open Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Life Years

Introduction: Recent health technology assessments (HTAs) of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in Ontario and Alberta, Canada, resulted in opposite recommendations, calling into question whether benefits of RARP offset the upfront investment. Therefore, the study objectives were to conduct a cost-utility analysis from a Canadian public payer perspective to determine the cost-effectiveness of RARP. Methods: Using a 10-year time horizon, a five-state Markov model was developed to compare RARP to open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Clinical parameters were derived from Canadian observational studies and a recently published systematic review. Costs, resource utilization, and utility values from recent Canadian sources were used to populate the model. Results were presented in terms of increment costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. A probabilistic analysis was conducted, and uncertainty was represented using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs). One-way sensitivity analyses were also conducted. Future costs and QALYs were discounted at 1.5%. Results: Total cost of RARP and ORP were $47 033 and $45 332, respectively. Total estimated QALYs were 7.2047 and 7.1385 for RARP and ORP, respectively. The estimated incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was $25 704 in the base-case analysis. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 and $100 000 per QALY gained, the probability of RARP being cost-effective was 0.65 and 0.85, respectively. The model was most sensitive to the time horizon. Conclusions: The results of this analysis suggest that RARP is likely to be cost-effective in this Canadian patient population. The results are consistent with Alberta’s HTA recommendation and other economic evaluations, but challenges Ontario’s reimbursement decision.

Cost-effectiveness of dual-mobility components in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures

2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (12) ◽  
pp. 1783-1790
Author(s):  
Spencer Montgomery ◽  
Jonathan Bourget-Murray ◽  
Daniel Z. You ◽  
Leo Nherera ◽  
Amir Khoshbin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Physiological Age ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures

Aims Total hip arthroplasty (THA) with dual-mobility components (DM-THA) has been shown to decrease the risk of dislocation in the setting of a displaced neck of femur fracture compared to conventional single-bearing THA (SB-THA). This study assesses if the clinical benefit of a reduced dislocation rate can justify the incremental cost increase of DM-THA compared to SB-THA. Methods Costs and benefits were established for patients aged 75 to 79 years over a five-year time period in the base case from the Canadian Health Payer’s perspective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the base case model conclusions. Results DM-THA was found to be cost-effective, with an estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAD $46,556 (£27,074) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Sensitivity analysis revealed DM-THA was not cost-effective across all age groups in the first two years. DM-THA becomes cost-effective for those aged under 80 years at time periods from five to 15 years, but was not cost-effective for those aged 80 years and over at any timepoint. To be cost-effective at ten years in the base case, DM-THA must reduce the risk of dislocation compared to SB-THA by at least 62%. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed DM-THA was 58% likely to be cost-effective in the base case. Conclusion Treating patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture using DM-THA components may be cost-effective compared to SB-THA in patients aged under 80 years. However, future research will help determine if the modelled rates of adverse events hold true. Surgeons should continue to use clinical judgement and consider individual patients’ physiological age and risk factors for dislocation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(12):1783–1790.

Ixazomib (IXA), carfilzomib (CAR), elotuzumab (ELO) or daratumumab (DAR) with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (LEN+DEX) versus LEN+DEX only in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM): A comparative cost-effectiveness analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8043-8043
Author(s):  
Mavis Obeng-Kusi ◽  
Daniel Arku ◽  
Neda Alrawashdh ◽  
Briana Choi ◽  
Nimer S. Alkhatib ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Treatment Comparison ◽  
Comparative Cost ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years

8043 Background: IXA, CAR, ELO and DARin combination with LEN+DEXhave been found superior in efficacy compared to LEN+DEX in the management of R/R MM. Applying indirect treatment comparisons from a network meta-analysis (NMA), this economic evaluation aimed to estimate the comparative cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of these four triplet regimens in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: In the absence of direct treatment comparison from a single clinical trial, NMA was used to indirectly estimate the comparative PFS benefit of each regimen. A 2-state Markov model simulating the health outcomes and costs was used to evaluate PFS life years (LY) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) with the triplet regimens over LEN+DEX and expressed as the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) and cost-utility ratios (ICUR). Probability sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the influence of parameter uncertainty on the model. Results: The NMA revealed that DAR+LEN+DEX was superior to the other triplet therapies, which did not differ statistically amongst them. As detailed in the Table, in our cost-effectiveness analysis, all 4 triplet regimens were associated with increased PFSLY and PFSQALY gained (g) over LEN+DEX at an additional cost. DAR+LEN+DEX emerged the most cost-effective with ICER and ICUR of $667,652/PFSLYg and $813,322/PFSQALYg, respectively. The highest probability of cost-effectiveness occurred at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $1,040,000/QALYg. Conclusions: Our economic analysis shows that all the triplet regimens were more expensive than LEN +DEX only but were also more effective with respect to PFSLY and PFSQALY gained. Relative to the other regimens, the daratumumab regimen was the most cost-effective.[Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document