COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS ON STARTING PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC MYELOID LEUKEMIA ON A HIGHLY POTENT TYROSINE KINASE INHIBITOR AND EARLY SWITCHING TO IMATINIB
Author(s)
Rochau U1, Vukicevic D2, Schmidt S3, Stenehjem D4, Brixner D4, Radich J5, Gastl G3, Siebert U6
1UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology,Dept. of Public Health&HTA/ ONCOTYROL - Center for Personalized Cancer Medicine, Hall in Tyrol/ Innsbruck, Austria, 2UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Dept. of Public Health & HTA, Hall in Tyrol, Austria, 3Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria, 4University of Utah, Pharmacotherapy Outcomes Research Center, Program in Personalized Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 5Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA, 6Department of Health Policy & Management, Harvard Medical School, Institute for Technology Assessment & Department of Radiology, Hall i.T., Austria
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of several sequential treatment strategies for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) dependent on early molecular response (EMR) in the Austrian healthcare context. METHODS: We adapted a previously developed Markov state-transition model to incorporate different treatment options (imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib) dependent on achievement of EMR after 3 months. We analyzed eight sequential treatment strategies using cohort simulation over a lifelong time horizon. Model parameters were extracted from published literature, epidemiological and economic databases. We applied a 3% discount for health outcomes and costs. We analyzed 3 different base-case scenarios for patients not achieving an EMR after 3-months of imatinib treatment that were switched to a second-generation TKI, assuming three different effectiveness for these second-generation TKIs. Comprehensive sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The base-case analysis resulted in two non-dominated strategies: (1) imatinib, followed by nilotinib in case of non-achieved EMR at 3 months and dasatinib after treatment failure or imatinib continuation in case of achieved 3-month EMR and nilotinib after treatment failure; (2) nilotinib followed by its continuation in case of non-achieved EMR at 3 months or switch to imatinib in case of achieved 3 month EMR and dasatinib after treatment failure. Depending on the scenario, strategy 2 resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €84,200/QALY, €118,500/QALY or €142,200/QALY gained compared to the baseline strategy. Remaining strategies were excluded due to dominance. Sensitivity analyses on generic pricing of imatinib showed that starting with a more potent second-generation TKI and switching to imatinib after an achieved EMR are the preferred strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our analyses, we suggest nilotinib and its continuation for non-achieved EMR at 3 months or switch to imatinib after achieved 3-month EMR and dasatinib after treatment failure as a cost-effective strategy for Austria if the willingness-to pay threshold is at least around €120,000/QALY.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2015-11, ISPOR Europe 2015, Milan, Italy
Value in Health, Vol. 18, No. 7 (November 2015)
Code
PCN184
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Oncology, Systemic Disorders/Conditions
Explore Related HEOR by Topic