Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Ixazomib PLUS Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone Versus Daratumumab PLUS Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone in Multiple Myeloma Patients Received More THAN One PRIOR Treatment in China
Author(s)
Zhao X1, Feng Y2, Zhu L2, Liu J2
1IQVIA, Shanghai, China, 2IQVIA, Beijing, China
OBJECTIVES With the approval of Daratumumab by the China National Medical Product Administration in 2019, this study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of Ixazomib plus lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) with Daratumumab plus lenalidomide-dexamethasone (DRd) among previously treated multiple myeloma patients in China. METHODS A partition survival model with three health states (progression-free survival, post-progression and death) was constructed from a societal perspective in China. The relative effectiveness of comparators was derived from a network meta-analysis synthesizing results of TOURMALINE-MM1 trial and POLLUX trial due to the lack of head-to-head trial data. Both direct (drug and administration, lab testing, health resource utilization, adverse event management and post-progression treatment) and indirect costs were considered in the analysis. Data inputs were obtained from published literature and clinical experts’ interviews. Cost and effectiveness were discounted at 5% and a half-cycle correction was applied. Primary model outcomes included total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs). One way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to assess the robustness of the model estimates. RESULTS In the base case of a lifetime horizon, our estimation showed that to achieve a 0.561 QALY gain from IRd (3.429 QALYs) to DRd (3.990 QALYs), an additional CNY 521,318 is required, which can be translated into an ICER of CNY 930,047/QALY for DRd versus IRd. Model results were sensitive to the hazard ratio of IRd and DRd compared with lenalidomide-dexamethasone in overall survival from the NMA results. PSA further demonstrated that DRd did not show a significant advantage over IRd, assuming a willingness to pay threshold of CNY 212,676 (triple GDP per capita in China in 2019). CONCLUSIONS Compared to IRd, DRd is not considered as a cost-effective treatment under current prices from a societal perspective among previously treated multiple myeloma patients in China.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2020-11, ISPOR Europe 2020, Milan, Italy
Value in Health, Volume 23, Issue S2 (December 2020)
Code
PCN60
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Economic Evaluation, Methodological & Statistical Research
Topic Subcategory
Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy, Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Oncology, Rare and Orphan Diseases