What Is the Impact of Including Outcomes-Based Agreements on the Cost-Effectiveness of Cell and Gene Therapies? A Case Example of Zynteglo for Transfusion-Dependent Beta Thalassemia


Richardson M1, Beaudoin F2, Rind DM1, Synnott P3, Herce-Hagiwara B1, Ollendorf D1
1Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, Boston, MA, USA, 2Brown University, Providence, RI, USA, 3Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA

Presentation Documents

OBJECTIVES: While interest in outcomes-based agreements has grown, their integration in value assessment is uncommon. We explored the impact of an outcomes-based agreement on the cost-effectiveness of cell and gene therapies using ICER’s review of Zynteglo for beta-thalassemia as a case example.

METHODS: A Markov cohort model with an upfront decision tree was used to model a hypothetical cohort of patients with transfusion dependent beta thalassemia being treated with Zynteglo or standard of care (SOC) over a lifetime time horizon. A publicly reported Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) price of $2.1 million was assumed for Zynteglo, and analyses were performed with and without an outcomes-based agreement involving an 80% payback if transfusion independence was not achieved or maintained over five years. Outcomes included life years, quality adjusted life years (QALY), costs, cost per QALY, and prices at $150,000/QALY with and without the outcomes-based agreement.

RESULTS: With an outcomes-based agreement, Zynteglo was more effective and more costly compared to SOC (incremental life years 2.85, QALYs 4.98, and costs $507,787) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $102,000/QALY. Under probabilistic analyses, Zynteglo had a 78% probability of being cost-effective at $150,000/QALY. With no outcomes-based agreement, incremental costs increased by 37% to $696,326, increasing the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to $140,000/QALY. The probability of being cost-effectiveness declined to 54%. Under conservative assumptions of treatment benefit, uncertainties were better managed with an outcomes-based agreement in place. With an outcomes-based agreement in place, the price could rise to $2.4 million and remain cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS: Direct integration of likely outcomes-based agreements in value assessments can allow stakeholders a full understanding of the cost and pricing implications of cell and gene therapies. Further exploration of the implications of such agreements is warranted, especially for interventions with greater uncertainty and/or safety concerns.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2024-05, ISPOR 2024, Atlanta, GA, USA

Value in Health, Volume 27, Issue 6, S1 (June 2024)




Clinical Outcomes, Economic Evaluation, Health Policy & Regulatory

Topic Subcategory

Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis, Performance-based Outcomes, Pricing Policy & Schemes, Risk-sharing Approaches


Genetic, Regenerative & Curative Therapies, Systemic Disorders/Conditions (Anesthesia, Auto-Immune Disorders (n.e.c.), Hematological Disorders (non-oncologic), Pain)

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now