COST COMPARISON OF ISATUXIMAB SUBCUTANEOUS, ISATUXIMAB INTRAVENOUS, AND DARATUMUMAB SUBCUTANEOUS IN MULTIPLE MYELOMA IN JAPAN
Author(s)
Lukasz Pyrek, MSc1, Aleksandra Drzewiecka, MSc1, Catriona Crossan, MSc2, Yoshie Onishi, RPh, DrPH3, Mariko Nomoto, MBA3, Chiho Tadera, PharmD4, Naoko Ozaki, PhD4, Tagami Nami, PhD4.
1Inizio Ignite Putnam, Kraków, Poland, 2Inizio Ignite Putnam, London, United Kingdom, 3Inizio Ignite Putnam, Tokyo, Japan, 4Sanofi K.K, Tokyo, Japan.
1Inizio Ignite Putnam, Kraków, Poland, 2Inizio Ignite Putnam, London, United Kingdom, 3Inizio Ignite Putnam, Tokyo, Japan, 4Sanofi K.K, Tokyo, Japan.
OBJECTIVES: Subcutaneous administration of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies may reduce administration-related resource use in multiple myeloma (MM). This analysis estimated 1-year treatment-related costs for isatuximab subcutaneous (Isa SC), isatuximab intravenous (Isa IV), and daratumumab subcutaneous (Dara SC) across relevant MM treatment settings in Japan.
METHODS: A cost analysis was conducted from the Japanese public healthcare payer’s perspective over a 1-year time horizon, with costs estimated in 2026 Japanese yen. The analysis included patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), both eligible and ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), as well as patients with relapsed or refractory MM (RRMM) with 1-3 prior lines or ≥2 prior therapies including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Patients received Isa or Dara in combination with Pd, Kd, or VRd regimens. Direct costs included drug acquisition, administration, and adverse events, based on national price lists and medical fee schedules. Treatment duration, dosing schedules, relative dose intensity, and infusion-related reaction rates were informed by clinical trial data. Sensitivity analyses assessed robustness to alternative model assumptions.
RESULTS: Over 1 year, total per-patient costs for Isa SC ranged from ¥7,253,404 to ¥17,196,139 across populations, consistently lower than Isa IV and Dara SC regimens. Compared with Isa IV, Isa SC generated savings of ¥556,901-¥2,681,868 per patient, corresponding to 6.7%-13.6% lower total costs, driven by reduced administration cost associated with the SC route. Compared with Dara SC, Isa SC generated savings of ¥1,797,335-¥5,893,643 per patient, corresponding to 9.5%-38.9% lower total costs, driven primarily by lower drug acquisition cost. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of base-case findings.
CONCLUSIONS: Isa SC was associated with consistent cost savings versus Isa IV and Dara SC across all assessed MM regimens in Japan, indicating its potential to reduce public healthcare expenditures, with additional administration-related advantages over Isa IV.
METHODS: A cost analysis was conducted from the Japanese public healthcare payer’s perspective over a 1-year time horizon, with costs estimated in 2026 Japanese yen. The analysis included patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), both eligible and ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), as well as patients with relapsed or refractory MM (RRMM) with 1-3 prior lines or ≥2 prior therapies including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Patients received Isa or Dara in combination with Pd, Kd, or VRd regimens. Direct costs included drug acquisition, administration, and adverse events, based on national price lists and medical fee schedules. Treatment duration, dosing schedules, relative dose intensity, and infusion-related reaction rates were informed by clinical trial data. Sensitivity analyses assessed robustness to alternative model assumptions.
RESULTS: Over 1 year, total per-patient costs for Isa SC ranged from ¥7,253,404 to ¥17,196,139 across populations, consistently lower than Isa IV and Dara SC regimens. Compared with Isa IV, Isa SC generated savings of ¥556,901-¥2,681,868 per patient, corresponding to 6.7%-13.6% lower total costs, driven by reduced administration cost associated with the SC route. Compared with Dara SC, Isa SC generated savings of ¥1,797,335-¥5,893,643 per patient, corresponding to 9.5%-38.9% lower total costs, driven primarily by lower drug acquisition cost. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of base-case findings.
CONCLUSIONS: Isa SC was associated with consistent cost savings versus Isa IV and Dara SC across all assessed MM regimens in Japan, indicating its potential to reduce public healthcare expenditures, with additional administration-related advantages over Isa IV.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
EE215
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Health Service Delivery & Process of Care, Health Technology Assessment
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, Oncology