Budget Impact of Selinexor Combination Regimens in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma

Author(s)

Carter JA1, Ijioma S2, Ray D3
1OPEN Health, Bethesda, MD, USA, 2Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc., Marietta, GA, USA, 3Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc., Newton, MA, USA

Presentation Documents

OBJECTIVES: Selinexor-based combination regimens (indicated for adult patients with multiple myeloma who have received ≥1 prior therapy) are associated with improved clinical outcomes in the relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) setting. Patient prognosis worsens once progression occurs after exposure to an immunomodulatory drug, proteasome inhibitor, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. We sought to assess the budget impact of selinexor-based combination regimens post anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody therapy in the 2nd-5th treatment line.

METHODS: A 3-year budget impact model was developed from the perspective of a hypothetical US private payer with 1,000,000 members. Scenarios with and without selinexor-based combinations and including 12 other guideline-supported non-selinexor regimens were compared. The model included incident patients with RRMM post anti-CD38 treatment. Costs (2023 US dollars) attributable to primary treatment drug acquisition and administration, adverse events, routine monitoring and medical services, post-progression treatment and medical services, and terminal care were included. Annual and cumulative total costs and incremental cost per patient per month (PPPM) and per member per month (PMPM) were assessed.

RESULTS: The 3-year cumulative costs comparing scenarios for 61 eligible patients with RRMM with and without selinexor-based combination regimens were $73,940,083 and $73,970,909, respectively (difference: -$30,826). PMPM was -$0.003 and PPPM was -$42 at 3 years. In univariate sensitivity analysis, outcomes were most sensitive to time on selinexor, selinexor combination regimen utilization, and utilization of CAR-T therapies. By model year 3, acquisition costs of selinexor-based combinations as primary therapy were offset by costs of secondary treatment received after disease progression.

CONCLUSIONS: Implementing selinexor-based combination regimens was associated with cost-savings cumulatively over 3 years due to the delay of more costly treatment options such as bispecific and CAR T therapies. Future research is warranted as the increased use of newer therapies such as bispecific and CAR-T therapies in earlier lines will change the economic paradigm in RRMM.

Conference/Value in Health Info

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

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

Code

EE403

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Budget Impact Analysis

Disease

No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, Systemic Disorders/Conditions (Anesthesia, Auto-Immune Disorders (n.e.c.), Hematological Disorders (non-oncologic), Pain)

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


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

×