Patterns of total cost and economic consequences of progression for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Quality of end-of-life care in multiple myeloma: A 13-year analysis of a population-based cohort in Ontario, Canada

Optimizing end-of-life (EOL) care for multiple myeloma (MM) represents an unmet need. An administrative cohort in Ontario, Canada was analysed between 2006 and 2018. Aggressive care was defined as two or more emergency-department visits in the last 30 days before death, or at least two new hospitalizations within 30 days of death, or an intensive care unit (ICU) admission within the last 30 days of life. Supportive care was defined as a physician house-call in the last two weeks before death, or a palliative nursing or personal support visit at home in the last 30 days before death. Among 5095 patients, 23.2% of patients received chemotherapy at EOL and 55.6% of patients died as inpatient. A minority received aggressive care at EOL [28.3%: autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), 20.4%: non-ASCT], and a majority received supportive care at EOL (65.4%: ASCT, 61.5%: non-ASCT). Supportive care was less likely to be received by those aged over 80 years and in lower-income neighbourhoods. Supportive care at EOL increased from 56.0% in 2006 to 70.3% in 2018. Despite improvements, many patients with MM experience aggressive care at EOL. Even in a publicly funded health care system, disparities based on age, income and community size are present.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Cost of Patients with Multiple Myeloma in Germany: A Retrospective Claims Data Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the healthcare resource use (HCRU) and associated costs of multiple myeloma (MM) using German claims data.

METHODS

Anonymized claims data from one of the largest sickness funds in Germany were analyzed. Costs and HCRU were calculated from the perspective of the statutory health insurance. To analyze MM-associated incremental costs in a most recent calendar period for an overall MM population (31 March 2018-31 March 2019), a prevalent cohort of MM patients (continuously insured during 01 January 2010 until 31 March 2019 or death; two or more outpatient and/or one inpatient MM diagnoses [ICD-10: C90.0-] and alive on 31 March 2018) was compared with a control group (not diagnosed with MM) employing propensity-score matching. Additionally, to describe MM-associated HCRU and costs for treated patients per line of treatment (lot), a cohort of newly treated patients was considered (≥ 12 months' pre-index period without MM treatment). Therapy lines were determined based on observed days of medication supply, treatment switches, and treatment discontinuations.

RESULTS

Overall, 2523 prevalent MM patients (52.0% female, mean age: 71.3 years) and 1673 newly treated MM patients (50.2% female, mean age: 73.0 years) met the selection criteria and were included in the analyses. After matching, a non-MM counterpart could be identified for 2474 prevalent out of 2523 MM patients. MM-associated incremental HCRU was characterized by an increased number of hospitalizations and a higher number of outpatient specialist visits (per patient-year [ppy] 0.48 additional hospitalizations and 3.80 additional specialist visits; p < 0.001), being also drivers of the associated total incremental add-on costs (15,381.09 € ppy, p < 0.001). Among newly treated patients, total direct costs ppy increased as patients received subsequent treatments (1st lot: 67,681,55 €; 4th lot+: 114,934.01 €), driven by outpatient MM prescriptions (1st lot: 28,692.32 €; 4th lot+: 62,980.72 €).

CONCLUSION

The economic burden of MM is driven by outpatient prescriptions, inpatient hospitalizations, and outpatient specialist visits. Treatment and overall costs increase substantially when patients move to later lines of treatment.

Association of High-Deductible Health Plan Enrollment With Spending on and Use of Lenalidomide Therapy Among Commercially Insured Patients With Multiple Myeloma

IMPORTANCE

High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) require high upfront cost-sharing, which has been associated with suboptimal anticancer medication uptake and adherence. Whether HDHP enrollment has limited the affordability and use of lenalidomide therapy among commercially insured patients with multiple myeloma is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of HDHP enrollment with out-of-pocket spending on and adherence to lenalidomide therapy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this cohort study, data were obtained from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database for adults aged 18 to 64 years with multiple myeloma who newly initiated lenalidomide therapy between April 1, 2013, and June 30, 2017. Quantile regression and modified Poisson regression evaluated out-of-pocket spending, and group-based trajectory models and multinomial logistic regression examined patterns of and factors associated with adherence. Analyses were conducted from April to August 2020.

EXPOSURES

High-deductible health plan enrollment in the 3 months before and 6 months after initiation of lenalidomide therapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Distribution of out-of-pocket spending, the probability of paying more than $100 for the first and any lenalidomide prescription fill, and monthly lenalidomide therapy adherence using the proportion of days covered (≥80%).

RESULTS

Of the 3163 commercially insured patients who initiated lenalidomide therapy (median age, 57 years [IQR, 53-60 years for HDHP enrollees and 52-61 years for non-HDHP enrollees]), 328 (10.4%) were enrolled in HDHPs and 1769 (55.9%) were women. Among the highest spenders (95th percentile), HDHP enrollees paid $376 (95% CI, -$28 to $780) and $217 (95% CI, $106-$323) more for their first and any lenalidomide prescription fill, respectively, compared with non-HDHP enrollees in the 6 months after initiation. High-deductible health plan enrollment was also associated with an increased risk of paying more than $100 for the initial (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.30 [95% CI, 1.13-1.50]) and any (aRR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.12-1.42]) lenalidomide prescription fill. Three adherence trajectory groups were identified: those with high adherence (n = 1273), late nonadherence (n = 1084), and early nonadherence (n = 805). High-deductible health plan enrollment was not associated with adherence group assignment.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, HDHP enrollment was associated with higher out-of-pocket spending per lenalidomide prescription fill; however, no statistically significant differences in adherence patterns between HDHP and non-HDHP enrollees were observed. Patient (eg, perceptions of treatment benefits), payer (eg, out-of-pocket maximums), and clinician (eg, counseling patients on disease severity) factors may have limited the potential for nonadherence among commercially insured patients who initiated lenalidomide therapy.

The relationship between cost and the recommendation, refusal, and discontinuation of treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia and multiple myeloma in Japan: a cross-sectional exploratory survey

AIMS

This study aimed to ascertain the number of patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) and transplant-ineligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM) not recommended by their physicians for optimal drug treatment or who refuse, discontinue, reduce, or skip treatment owing to cost in Japan.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among hematologists, hematologic oncologists, and oncologists in Japan treating ≥1 patient with CML or ≥5 transplant-ineligible patients with MM per year.

RESULTS

A total of 212 physicians participated: 105 treating patients with CML and 107 treating transplant-ineligible patients with MM. While treatment cost did not lead to non-optimal treatment most patients, physicians reported that they recommended non-optimal treatment to 6.53% of their patients with CML and 1.41% of their transplant-ineligible patients with MM, that 1.51 and 0.35% of their patients, respectively, refused treatment and that 1.97 and 0.71% discontinued treatment owing to treatment cost. However, no significant differences in the effect of treatment cost on recommendation, discontinuation, refusal, or reduction of treatment were observed. Non-recommendation of optimal treatment owing to treatment cost was most common for third-line CML and fourth-line transplant-ineligible MM treatment. Discontinuation due to treatment cost was most common in third-line treatment for both.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that non-optimal treatment due to treatment cost occurs among some physicians in Japan for patients with CML and transplant-ineligible patients with MM, but it may be limited to a small percentage of patients. Further research is needed to identify the drivers of treatment decisions for physicians and patients, including those involving treatment cost.

Real-world analysis of patient characteristics, treatment outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization across Europe in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma ineligible for stem cell transplantation who received lenalidomide- or bortezomib-based regimens

We aimed to compare real-world outcomes, resource use, and costs for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) treated with continuous first-line (1 L) lenalidomide or fixed bortezomib in Europe. We performed a multicenter, retrospective, observational chart review of transplant-ineligible NDMM patients across 7 countries. Of 453 eligible patients, 220 received 1 L lenalidomide-based regimens; 105 (47.7%) received second-line (2 L) treatment, of which 50 (47.6%) received 2 L bortezomib. 233 patients received 1 L bortezomib-based regimens; 142 (60.9%) had 2 L treatment, of which 104 (73.2%) received 2 L lenalidomide. Patients receiving 1 L lenalidomide-based regimens had better progression-free survival than patients receiving 1 L bortezomib-based regimens (p = .002) and a longer time to 2 L or third-line treatment (both p < .05). Total treatment-associated monthly costs for patients receiving 1 L lenalidomide-based regimens (n = 171, €2,268.55) were significantly greater than for 1 L bortezomib-based regimens (n = 188, €1,724.77) (p < .001) over the follow-up period (median, 38.7 months).

Survival, health care resource utilization and expenditures of first-line treatments for multiple myeloma patients ineligible for transplant in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

We aimed to provide real-world information on survival, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and expenditures related to various first lines of therapy (1LOTs) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients who were transplant ineligible (TI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database (2008-2016), we identified 1,511 NDMM-TI patients who had received 1LOT since June 2012. We categorized 1LOT regimens into four groups: bortezomib (V)+thalidomide (T), V, T, and non-V/T. Patients' characteristics were collected. The overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), frequencies of HCRU (hospitalization, visiting outpatient and emergency departments), and related expenditures within one year after commencement of the 1LOT were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

The mean age of the included patients was 71.3 (SD 10.7) years, and 40.4% of patients had a CCI score ≥3. Most patients (747; 49.4%) were in the V+T group and, after adjusting for covariates, had a significantly longer OS (median, 22.2 months) and EFS (9.1 months) than those in the T group (12.6 and 4.5 months, respectively) and the non-V/T group (12.2 and 3.2 months, respectively), but they were mostly comparable with patients in the V group (23.8 and 6.6 months, respectively). Compared to those in the V+T group, patients in the T and non-V/T groups had 29% and 39% fewer outpatient visits and 15% and 24% lower total expenditure, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our real-world data consolidate evidence for the effectiveness of bortezomib-containing regimens as the 1LOT in NDMM-TI patients at the expense of more outpatient visits and higher total costs.

Healthcare resource utilisation and sickness absence in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients who did not undergo autologous stem cell transplantation: Trends in Sweden with the changing treatment landscape

OBJECTIVES

The introduction of novel drugs has significantly improved outcomes for multiple myeloma (MM) patients. This study describes survival, healthcare resource utilisation and sickness absence in association with the changing MM treatment landscape over time, focussing on patients who did not undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT).

METHODS

Population-based, retrospective registry study in Sweden, where 7012 non-ASCT patients diagnosed between 2001 and 2015 were stratified into diagnosis periods 2001-2005 (n = 2053), 2006-2010 (n = 2372) and 2011-2015 (n = 2587).

RESULTS

Median survival increased from 2.5 to 3.4 years from 2001-2005 to 2011-2015. During the first 3 years of follow-up, patients diagnosed during 2011-2015 spent 29% and 12% less time in health care (55 days; inpatient admissions and outpatient visits) than patients diagnosed during 2001-2005 (78 days) and 2006-2010 (63 days), respectively. This was associated with less inpatient and more outpatient healthcare usage. Average 3-year sickness absence (362 days) was 31% and 12% less than for patients diagnosed during 2001-2005 (522 days) and 2006-2010 (410 days), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings of improved survival, reduced healthcare needs and greater productivity in non-ASCT MM patients with access to improved treatment practices and novel drugs provide important real-world cost-benefit insights for the continued development and introduction of treatments for MM.

Real-world treatment patterns in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Clinical and economic outcomes in patients treated with pomalidomide or daratumumab

INTRODUCTION

Real-world evidence on later line treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is sparse. We evaluated clinical outcomes among RRMM patients in the 1-year following treatment with pomalidomide or daratumumab and compared economic outcomes between RRMM patients and non-MM patients.

PATIENT AND METHODS

Adult patients with ≥1 claim of pomalidomide or daratumumab were identified between January 2012 and February 2018 using IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus US claims database. Patients were required to have a diagnosis or treatment for MM and a claim of any immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors before the index date. Mean time to new therapy, overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier curve and adverse events (AEs) were reported over the 1-year post-index period. RRMM patients were also matched to a non-MM comparator cohort and economic outcomes were compared between the two cohorts.

RESULTS

289 RRMM patients were matched to 1,445 patients without MM. Most prevalent hematological AE was anemia (72.0%) and non-hematological AE was infections (75.4%). Mean (SD) time to a new treatment was 4.7 (5.3) months and median OS was 14.6 months. RRMM patients had significantly higher hospitalizations and physician office visits (Both P < .0001) compared to non-MM patients. Adjusting for baseline characteristics, patients with RRMM had 4.9 times (95% CI 3.8-6.4, P < .0001) the total healthcare costs compared with patients without MM. The major driver of total costs among RRMM patients was pharmacy costs (67.3%).

CONCLUSION

RRMM patients showed a high frequency of AEs, low OS, and a substantial economic burden suggesting need for effective treatment options.

Economic burden of disease progression among multiple myeloma patients who have received transplant and at least one line of therapy in the US

Effects of disease progression on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs among multiple myeloma (MM) patients with ≥1 line of therapy (LOT) who received their first stem cell transplant (SCT) within 1 year of initial MM diagnosis were estimated using a large US claims database. Disease progression was defined as advancement to the next LOT, bone metastasis, hypercalcemia, soft tissue plasmacytoma, skeletal related events, acute kidney disease, or death within 12 months of LOT initiation. Annual HRU and costs in the first three LOTs (L1-L3) were compared for patients with versus without disease progression using inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for differences between groups in baseline characteristics. In all LOTs, mean annual hospitalizations and healthcare costs were greater for patients with versus without progression. Total incremental annual costs among patients with versus without progression in L1-L3 were $18,359, $87,055, and $71,917, respectively, among LOTs initiated between 2006 and 2018. In LOTs initiated between 2013 and 2018, the figures were $46,024, $100,329, and $101,942 in L1-L3, respectively. The economic burden of disease progression is substantial in this population of MM patients who underwent SCT and received systemic anti-myeloma therapy.

Real-world treatment patterns, healthcare use and costs in triple-class exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients in the USA

Aim: To estimate treatment patterns and healthcare costs among triple-class exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. Materials & methods: Eligible patients had ≥1 line of therapy (LOT) each of proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs and daratumumab in December 2015-September 2018 and received a new LOT. Results: A total of 154 patients were included with a median follow-up of 6.2 months. Median time from diagnosis to new LOT was 41.0 months. Kaplan-Meier estimate of median time to therapy discontinuation was 4.2 months. Mean per-patient, per-month MM-related costs were USD 35,657. Most frequently observed regimens were lenalidomide or pomalidomide + daratumumab (18.2%), lenalidomide or pomalidomide + proteasome inhibitors (15.6%) and lenalidomide or pomalidomide monotherapy (11.0%). Conclusion: Triple-class exposed RRMM patients receive heterogeneous treatments for a short duration with high healthcare resource utilization and costs.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma treated with proteasome inhibitors in real-world clinical practice in Germany

AIMS

To assess the real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with different proteasome inhibitors (PIs) for the treatment of patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in Germany.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective medical chart review of treatment patterns, outcomes, and HRU for patients with RRMM treated with bortezomib, carfilzomib, or ixazomib in second- or third-line (2L or 3L) therapy in Germany. Data were collected between 1 January 2017 and 30 June 2017. Costs were calculated based on drug prices and unit costs in Germany.

RESULTS

Physicians provided data on 302 patients. Mean monthly total direct costs per patient receiving PI-based therapy were €7,925 and €10,693 for 2L and 3L, respectively, of which approximately 90% was anti-myeloma drug costs. Overall, the highest costs were associated with patients receiving 3L therapy. Regardless of treatment line, costs were higher for patients who had received a stem cell transplant (SCT) in a previous treatment line than for those who had not; the data suggest that this reflects the use of triplet regimens following a SCT. Patients with a complete response (CR) experienced no unplanned hospitalizations during the study period, whereas patients with progressive disease experienced the highest number of unplanned and planned hospitalizations. In 2L therapy, the highest proportion of patients with a CR was observed in those receiving carfilzomib (12% carfilzomib; 4% bortezomib; 0% ixazomib).

LIMITATIONS

Patients with missing or incomplete follow-up data were included in the study and were accounted for using monthly cost estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-myeloma drugs were the main contributor to total HRU costs associated with RRMM in Germany. Improved treatment response was associated with lower costs and reduced hospitalizations.

Time to Next Treatment as a Meaningful Endpoint for Trials of Primary Cutaneous Lymphoma

Time to next treatment (TTNT) is an emerging endpoint in clinical studies of primary cutaneous T-cell lymphomas (CTCL), with utility as a surrogate marker for the “duration of clinical benefit”. TTNT provides a highly clinically meaningful endpoint that uniquely reflects not only the duration of treatment efficacy on disease and symptom control, but also incorporates the patient experience by accounting for patient compliance and tolerance to the studied therapy(s). Given the distinct challenges of pin-pointing the exact date of progression in patients with multi-compartmental CTCL, TTNT overcomes many of the shortcomings of conventional, disease-focused, clinical endpoints in primary CTCL research. Although widely accepted in clinical research for numerous other incurable malignancies, TTNT currently lacks a standardised definition. In this paper, we describe the value of TTNT as a clinical endpoint, review the applications of TTNT in primary CTCL research, and propose a standardised definition of TTNT to be applied in future clinical research of primary CTCL therapies.

Lenalidomide maintenance post-transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: real-world outcomes and costs

Aim: To compare real-world outcomes and costs among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma receiving lenalidomide-only maintenance (Len-Mt) versus no maintenance after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Patients & methods: Time to next treatment (TTNT) was evaluated; costs were calculated for 0–12, 12–24 and 24–36 months postindex date. Results: Len-Mt cohort had longer TTNT (HR: 0.43; p < 0.0001). Per-patient per-month costs during months 0–12 were higher among patients, receiving Len-Mt (USD 13,095 vs USD 8910; p < 0.0001), due to higher pharmacy costs – outpatient costs were lower. During months 12–24 and 24–36, outpatient costs were similar in both cohorts; total and pharmacy costs remained elevated for patients receiving Len-Mt. Conclusion: Len-Mt improved TTNT, initially reduced outpatient costs, but resulted in higher overall and pharmacy costs.

Burden of disease progression in patients with multiple myeloma in the US

Effects of disease progression on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs among multiple myeloma (MM) patients with ≥1 line of therapy (LOT) and without receipt of stem cell transplant were estimated using large US claims database. Disease progression was defined as advancement to the next LOT, bone metastasis, hypercalcemia, soft tissue plasmacytoma, skeletal related events, acute kidney failure, or death within 12 months of LOT initiation. Annual HRU and costs in the first four LOTs were compared for patients with versus without progression using inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for differences between groups in baseline characteristics. In all LOTs, mean annual hospitalizations and healthcare costs were greater for patients with versus without progression. Total incremental annual costs among patients with versus without progression in 1LOT to 4LOT were $25,920, $30,632, $47,320, and $19,769, respectively. For MM patients receiving drug therapy, the economic burden of disease progression is substantial.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical and Economic Outcomes in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Treated With Lenalidomide- and/or Bortezomib-containing Regimens Without Stem Cell Transplant in a Real-world Setting

BACKGROUND

Real-world data in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) are sparse. Using United States claims databases, we analyzed treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health care utilization and costs in patients receiving lenalidomide- and/or bortezomib-containing therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient claims were obtained from a large commercial and Medicare database (October 2009 to May 2015). Patients with NDMM who received lenalidomide- and/or bortezomib-containing therapy and did not receive stem cell transplant (SCT) were analyzed. Duration of treatment (DOT), time to next treatment (TTNT), and health care utilization and costs were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 3075 patients, 1767 received doublet therapy (814 lenalidomide-dexamethasone [Rd], 953 bortezomib-dexamethasone [Vd]) and 464 received triplet therapy (318 lenalidomide-bortezomib-dexamethasone [RVd], 146 cyclophosphamide-bortezomib-dexamethasone [CyBord]). Rd versus Vd resulted in longer median DOT (12.0 vs. 5.9 months; P < .0001) and median TTNT (36.7 vs. 24.4 months; P = .0005). Year 1 costs were greater with Rd versus Vd (Δ = $14,964; P = .0009), primarily owing to higher pharmacy costs; outpatient physician visits and chemotherapy administration costs were lower. Median DOT (14.8 vs. 9.0 months; P < .0001) and median TTNT (35.7 vs. 22.3 months; P = .0007) were longer with RVd versus CyBord; year 1 costs were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of patients with NDMM ineligible for transplant, the median duration of therapy was approximately 70% of that in clinical trial observations. Lenalidomide therapy versus Vd and CyBord resulted in longer DOT, which correlated with longer TTNT, and higher pharmacy costs, which were partially offset by lower outpatient and chemotherapy administration costs.

Economic Burden of Patients Treated for Higher-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (HR-MDS) in Routine Clinical Care in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Significant clinical burden is associated with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (HR-MDS); however, the economic burden has not been fully examined. We examined cost of care and healthcare utilization (HCU) in HR-MDS patients engaged in routine care in the United States (US).

METHODS

Adult US patients diagnosed with HR-MDS from 1/1/2008 to 10/31/2015 were identified from the Optum database. Patients were followed until death, progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML), end of enrollment, or end of study (12/31/2015). Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)-related costs/HCU (including medical/pharmacy claims with a primary diagnosis of MDS, MDS-related treatment, or supportive care) and non-MDS-related costs/HCU were evaluated. Costs were calculated as per-patient per-month (PPPM) costs adjusted to 2015 US dollars.

RESULTS

Of the 209 HR-MDS patients included, median follow-up was 9.9 months (interquartile range 4.6-17.9), and 69.4% had at least one inpatient admission, 56.9% had at least one emergency department visit, and nearly all patients had at least one outpatient visit. Average PPPM costs over follow-up were $17,361; year 1 versus year 2 costs were higher ($17,337 vs $12,976) following HR-MDS diagnosis. The majority of costs were for MDS-related medical services ($10,327 PPPM). MDS-related medical PPPM costs decreased from $10,557 (year 1) to $6530 (year 2). The main drivers of MDS-related medical costs and the decrease in year 2 were chemotherapy and supportive care costs.

CONCLUSIONS

The economic burden of HR-MDS is considerable, particularly within the first year of diagnosis. Treatment/supportive care costs accounted for a significant portion of MDS-related costs. As HR-MDS treatment evolves, the economic impact and HCU need to be further investigated.

A U.S. Cost Analysis of Triplet Regimens for Patients with Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the FDA has approved several 3-agent (i.e., triplet) combinations for previously treated multiple myeloma (MM), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) now recommends triplet regimens over doublets. Little is known about the real-world cost of triplet combinations because of the limited time that they have been on the market since FDA approval. Furthermore, traditional cost analyses developed to support market entrance rely on utilization assumptions that are difficult to validate when numerous comparators simultaneously enter the market.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a 1-year cost analysis of novel triplets used for the treatment of patients with previously treated MM controlling for differences in utilization.

METHODS

FDA-approved, NCCN-recommended (preferred and category 1 for previously treated MM) treatments included in the analysis were daratumumab plus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (DARA/LEN/DEX), daratumumab plus bortezomib plus dexamethasone (DARA/BOR/DEX), elotuzumab plus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (ELO/LEN/DEX), carfilzomib plus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (CAR/LEN/DEX), and ixazomib plus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (IXA/LEN/DEX). To control for market uptake, the model was designed to estimate the cost of treating an average patient over a 1-year time horizon. Drug administration and dosing, required comedications, postprogression therapy, monitoring requirements, and adverse event (AE) rates were based on FDA prescribing information or clinical trials. AEs ≥ grade 3 that occurred in ≥ 5% of patients were included. RED BOOK wholesale acquisition costs were used for drug acquisition costs. Costs of drug administration, AE management, and patient monitoring were based on the 2018 Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services payment rates or from published literature (inflated to 2018 U.S. dollars). The treatment duration for each regimen was estimated from modeled progression-free survival data; the 12-month progression-free survival rate was assumed to be equivalent to the probability that an average patient remained on therapy for at least 1 year after treatment initiation, which was used to estimate time-depended treatment-related costs. The probability of progression within 1 year of treatment initiation was used to inform the average postprogression therapy costs for each regimen.

RESULTS

The estimated cost per patient for each triplet regimen was $13,890 (DARA/BOR/DEX), $22,231 (IXA/LEN/DEX), $24,322 (ELO/LEN/DEX), $26,410 (DARA/LEN/DEX), and $27,432 (CAR/LEN/DEX). Drug acquisition costs and treatment duration were the largest drivers of cost. Scenario analyses with plausible alternative input parameters found the maximum per month cost of therapy to be $30,657 (CAR/LEN/DEX) and the minimum per month cost of therapy to be $13,784 (DARA/BOR/DEX).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis controlled for differential utilization rates for 5 FDA-approved, NCCN-recommended triplet therapies for the treatment of previously treated MM. Of the examined regimens, treatment with DARA/BOR/DEX was estimated to have the lowest average monthly cost per patient, while CAR/LEN/DEX was the most expensive. As is common with modeling, some assumptions were necessary, and results may not be generalizable.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, which employs Maiese and funded Cornerstone Research Group, a health economic consulting group, to complete the cost analysis, interpret data, and develop the manuscript. Janssen was involved in the design of the analysis, interpretation of results, and manuscript development and approval. Grima is a founding partner of Cornerstone Research Group, which employs Hollmann, Goyert, and Moldaver. Hollmann, Goyert, and Moldaver were responsible for creation of the economic model. This work was peer-reviewed and presented as an abstract at the Lymphoma and Myeloma 2017 International Congress; October 26-28, 2017; New York, NY.

Costs Associated with Productivity Loss Among U.S. Patients Newly Diagnosed with Multiple Myeloma Receiving Oral Versus Injectable Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The use of novel drug agents in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) has been associated with improved therapeutic outcomes and survival; however, MM continues to pose a significant economic burden on patients and health care systems. Evaluating economic implications of therapies can provide key points of distinctions between available treatment options. Patients with MM may experience productivity loss, including lost days from work or inability to work due to MM symptoms or to undergoing treatment. Although direct costs of illness have been well described in the literature, indirect costs associated with MM are understudied.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the extent of disability benefit use and resultant workplace productivity loss among U.S. adult patients with newly diagnosed MM who received oral versus injectable MM therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters, Medicare Supplemental Coordination of Benefits, and Health and Productivity Management databases (2008-2015). Workplace absenteeism, as measured by disability benefit use, was evaluated 1 year before and 1 year after first MM diagnosis. Patients receiving only oral chemotherapy were compared with those who received injectable therapy. Absenteeism days and associated costs were compared among study groups using multivariable zero-inflated Poisson regression.

RESULTS

The final study cohort included 299 patients with newly diagnosed MM, of whom 73 received oral therapy only and 226 received injectable therapy. Treatment type was a significant predictor of disability benefit use. Patients who received injectable therapy missed an average of 110 work days in the 1 year after diagnosis, compared with 87 for patients receiving only oral therapy (difference of 23 days, 95% CI = 19-26, P < 0.001). Treatment type was also a significant predictor of costs associated with lost productivity. Patients who received injectable therapy experienced productivity loss valued at $18,315, compared with patients who only received oral drug therapy ($14,429). The difference between these estimates was statistically significant ($3,886, 95% CI = $3,540-$4,231, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients newly diagnosed with MM face significant losses in productivity. Patients receiving injectable MM therapy use significantly more disability benefits and incur higher productivity costs, compared with those receiving oral MM therapy. Further studies elucidating the nature of the differences between injectable and noninjectable chemotherapy users are needed.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company. Yong and Noga are employees of Millennium Pharmaceuticals. Merola reports personal fees from Millennium Pharmaceuticals during the time of this study.

Treatment Outcomes and Health Care Resource Utilization in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Receiving Lenalidomide-only Maintenance, Any Maintenance, or No Maintenance: Results from the Connect MM Registry

PURPOSE

Maintenance therapy after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) improves clinical outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM), but the effect of continued treatment with lenalidomide-only maintenance, or any maintenance, on health care resource utilization (HCRU) is largely unknown.

METHODS

Here we present an analysis of HCRU and clinical outcomes in a cohort of patients from the Connect MM registry, the largest, ongoing, observational, prospective US registry of patients with symptomatic newly diagnosed MM. In this study, patients with newly diagnosed MM who completed induction and single ASCT without subsequent consolidation received lenalidomide-only maintenance (n = 180), any maintenance (n = 256), or no maintenance (n = 165). HCRU (hospitalization, surgery/procedures, and concurrent medications [growth factors, bisphosphonates, or neuropathic pain medication]) was assessed starting from 100 days post-ASCT for up to 2 years.

FINDINGS

Although the rates of hospitalization per 100 person-years were similar across groups at the end of years 1 and 2, the median duration of hospitalization was numerically longer with no maintenance. The rates of use of growth factors, bisphosphonates, and neuropathic pain medication were generally similar in all 3 groups. The receipt of any maintenance was associated with significantly reduced use of neuropathic pain medications during year 1. Of note, lenalidomide-only maintenance was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival (54.5 vs 30.4 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.79; P = 0.0005) and overall survival (OS) (median OS not reached in either group; HR = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.73; P = 0.001) compared with no maintenance. Likewise, the group treated with any maintenance had significantly longer median progression-free survival (44.7 vs 30.4 months; HR = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.82; P = 0.0008) and OS (median OS not reached in either group; HR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33-0.76; P = 0.001) than did the group that did not receive maintenance.

IMPLICATIONS

These findings suggest that in this largely community-based study population, post-ASCT maintenance therapy, including lenalidomide-only maintenance, improves clinical outcomes without negatively affecting HCRU. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01081028.

Chart review across EU5 in MM post-ASCT patients

Aim:

To understand the current treatment patterns, clinical outcomes and healthcare resource utilization–associated costs for multiple myeloma patients, post autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) across Europe.

Patients & methods:

Medical records were used to abstract data for 337 multiple myeloma patients who had received ASCT.

Results:

Following ASCT, 7% received maintenance therapy prior to progression. Lenalidomide was the most frequently prescribed maintenance, second- and third-line therapy. Monthly resource use was considerably lower in patients who received maintenance therapy (€638.14 vs €1001.74). Median time to progression was longer for patients who had received maintenance therapy.

Conclusion:

The study highlights the diversity in current treatment patterns post-ASCT. Results suggest patients who receive maintenance therapy have a prolonged remission period, and as a result their associated healthcare resource utilization is spread across the treatment pathway.

Value and Cost of Myeloma Therapy-We Can Afford It

A national conversation regarding the price and affordability of drugs exists, where concern for value and benefits of medications is challenged by the increasing price of both injectable and oral medications, including the cost of care of myeloma. At the same time, we have seen unprecedented improvements in the overall survival of patients with myeloma, mostly because of the availability of these new drugs. Here, we present data to assert that these medications and associated expenses are of direct benefit to patients and society. The entrepreneurial reward for drug development in the United States has fueled vigorous drug development efforts that have culminated in the approval of 11 new drugs for the treatment of myeloma by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) since 1999. These patented drugs are available to patients in the United States usually at a higher price than in the rest of the world. Nevertheless, the majority of patients, via direct copay assistance or through indirect support via third parties, have access to these drugs irrespective of their socioeconomic status. One of the major regulatory hurdles that prevents access to these drugs is the legal impossibility that pharmaceutical companies have in directly supporting copay assistance for patients with government-funded health care. Moreover, assessments of value should include formal pharmacoeconomic analyses performed by experts. Interference with market forces and coercive action, such as price controls, or exercising eminent domain in the quest for cheaper medications will stymie innovation and rob us of the cures of the future.

Healthcare resource utilization among patients with relapsed multiple myeloma in the UK, France, and Italy

AIMS

To assess the real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with different treatment regimens used in the management of patients with relapsed multiple myeloma in the UK, France, and Italy.

METHODS

Retrospective medical chart review of characteristics, time to progression, level of response, HRU during treatment, and adverse events (AEs). Data collection started on June 1, 2015 and was completed on July 15, 2015. In the 3 months before record abstraction, eligible patients had either disease progression after receiving one of their country's most commonly prescribed regimens or had received the best supportive care and died. Costs were calculated based on HRU and country-specific diagnosis-related group and/or unit reference costs, amongst other standard resources.

RESULTS

Physicians provided data for 1,282 patients (387 in the UK, 502 in France, 393 in Italy) who met the inclusion criteria. Mean [median] total healthcare costs associated with a single line of treatment were €51,717 [35,951] in the UK, €37,009 [32,538] for France, and €34,496 [42,342] for Italy, driven largely by anti-myeloma medications costs (contributing 95.0%, 90.0%, and 94.2% of total cost, respectively). During active treatment, the highest costs were associated with lenalidomide- and pomalidomide-based regimens. Mean cost per month was lowest for patients achieving a very good partial response or better. Unscheduled events (i.e. not considered part of routine management, whether or not related to multiple myeloma, such as unscheduled hospitalization, AEs, fractures) accounted for 1-9% of total costs and were highest for bendamustine.

LIMITATIONS

The use of retrospective data means that clinical practice (e.g. use of medical procedures, evaluation of treatment response) is not standardized across participating countries/centers, and some data (e.g. low-grade AEs) may be incomplete or differently adjudicated/reported. The centers involved may not be fully representative of national practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Drug costs are the main contributor to total HRU costs associated with multiple myeloma. The duration of active treatment may influence the average total costs, as well as response, associated with a single line of therapy. Improved treatment outcomes, and reductions in unscheduled events and concomitant medication use may, therefore, reduce the overall HRU and related costs of care in multiple myeloma.

Comparative effectiveness of early-line nab-paclitaxel vs. paclitaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a US community-based real-world analysis

Background

Real-world analyses of treatments for patients with metastatic breast cancer are limited. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel vs. paclitaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer using data from an electronic medical record database from community practices across the USA.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study using fully de-identified data from an independent US electronic medical record platform of patients with metastatic breast cancer initiating single-agent nab-paclitaxel or paclitaxel as a first- or second-line treatment from December 1, 2010 to October 6, 2014. The clinical efficacy objectives were time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) and time to next treatment (TTNT). Subgroup analyses were performed in patients with 2 types of metastatic breast cancer as follows: 1) hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative, and 2) triple-negative disease.

Results

This analysis included 925 patients. Patients receiving nab-paclitaxel vs. paclitaxel had significantly longer TTD (median 4.2 vs. 2.8 months, P<0.0001) and TTNT (median 6.0 vs. 4.2 months, P<0.0001); similar outcomes were observed for patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative disease. Compared with paclitaxel, nab-paclitaxel was associated with significantly longer TTD in patients with triple-negative disease. nab-Paclitaxel was associated with significantly less all-grade neuropathy, anemia, pain, and diarrhea than paclitaxel. Antiemetic and antihistamine use were significantly less frequent with nab-paclitaxel vs. paclitaxel, whereas use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, hydrating agents, and bone-directed therapy to decrease skeletal-related events were more frequent.

Conclusion

nab-Paclitaxel demonstrated improved clinical effectiveness compared with paclitaxel when examining TTD and TTNT in patients with metastatic breast cancer in a real-world setting.

Economic burden of multiple myeloma among patients in successive lines of therapy in the United States

This study characterized the costs of multiple myeloma (MM) during first-line (1L), second-line (2L) and third-line (3L) treatment from the US payer perspective. Patients with ≥2 outpatient or ≥1 inpatient claims with a primary MM diagnosis and 12 months continuous enrollment post index were identified in a retrospective claims database between 1 July 2006 and 30 June 2013. A cost per-patient per-month (PPPM) metric was used to calculate total all-cause and anti-MM pharmacy costs in 1L, 2L, and 3L treatment. Of 5704 patients included, 3626 initiated 1L treatment, 1797 initiated 2L and 817 initiated 3L. Average total all-cause PPPM costs were $22,527 in 1L, $35,266 in 2L and $47,417 in 3L. Anti-MM pharmacy costs represented 22%, 29% and 29% of total all-cause costs PPPM in 1L, 2L and 3L, respectively. Study results suggest that delaying 2L and/or 3L treatment initiation may result in lower treatment costs for patients with MM.

Cost-Effectiveness of Novel Agents in Medicare Patients with Multiple Myeloma: Findings from a U.S. Payer's Perspective

BACKGROUND

Since multiple myeloma (MM) incurs a substantial economic burden in care management, more and more discussion has been generated in recent years about the costs of novel antimyeloma drugs and their associated value. Because of these costs, economic assessment that quantifies value of care over the long-term is essential.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness (measured as cost per life-year saved) of front-line novel agent-based therapy use among a cohort of elderly patients with MM in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We identified 2,551 elderly patients with advanced MM from 2000 to 2009 who initiated novel agent-based therapy (bortezomib, lenalidomide, or thalidomide) or chemotherapy from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data. Patients were characterized according to age at diagnosis, sex, race, geographic region, marital status, socioeconomic status, comorbidities, and receipt of novel agents. Twenty-month cost of care and overall survival related to MM were compared between patients treated with novel agent-based therapy and patients treated with chemotherapy. A net monetary benefit approach and corresponding cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of novel agent-based therapy.

RESULTS

Overall, average 12-month MM total costs were 2.03 times higher for novel agent-based therapy ($144,665) than for chemotherapy ($47,750). Antimyeloma pharmacy costs represented about 31% ($45,095) of total MM costs for patients treated with novel agents but represented about 19% ($8,921) of total MM costs for patients treated with chemotherapy. Twelve-month survival rates increased significantly among patients receiving novel agents compared with patients receiving chemotherapy. In the incremental net monetary benefit analysis, after adjusting for potential covariates, patient use of novel agents was only cost-effective compared with chemotherapy when the willingness-to-pay thresholds were high, at about $230,000.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the most common treatment practices in the United States, the use of novel agent-based therapy is not cost-effective at its current level of cost and effectiveness. Future studies should evaluate the generalizability of these results by evaluating cost-effectiveness of novel agent-based therapy use in different patient populations.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this study was contributed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01-H5018956). The authors have nothing to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed by Chen, Lairson, and Du, along with Chan. Chen and Du took the lead in data collection, along with Lairson and Huo. Data interpretation was performed by Chen, Chan, and Du, along with Lairson and Huo. The manuscript was written by Chen, along with Du, Lairson, Chan, and Huo, and revised by primarily by Du, along with Lairson, Huo, Chen, and Chan.

The Cost Impact of Lenalidomide for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma in the EU5

Introduction

Lenalidomide is an active agent that was approved for use in the EU in 2015 as a first-line therapy for previously untreated, non-transplant eligible multiple myeloma patients. Our objective was to assess the cost impact of lenalidomide when selected as a first-line treatment for transplant-ineligible patients in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom (EU5).

Methods

We developed a cost-impact model of the total costs associated with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma over 5 years in the EU5 based on treatment duration and time to progression (TTP) (taken from trial data). We compared a baseline scenario (of current lenalidomide uptake) with two alternative future scenarios. Future Scenario A used an increased uptake of first-line lenalidomide: up to 50% in Year 5. Future Scenario B was similar to the baseline, but included a 20% increased uptake of the triple therapy regimen, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) at second line.

Results

Compared to alternative first-line care pathways, lenalidomide provides a time to progression advantage of up to 5.1 months. In the baseline scenario, the costs per patient were €40,692 in Year 1. Future Scenario A showed an additional expenditure of €867 per patient in Year 1, increasing to €3358 per patient by Year 5, a 2.1% and 8.2% increase from baseline, respectively. However, lenalidomide use was associated with a lower monthly hospitalisation per-patient cost (€813) compared with bortezomib (€1173) and thalidomide (€1532). Future Scenario B was associated with a 29% increase in cost.

Conclusions

Compared to other first line therapies, lenalidomide delays time to progression resulting in associated savings across a patient’s treatment pathway and overall is likely to result in a limited impact on budget. Lenalidomide should, therefore, be considered as a first treatment option for multiple myeloma patients ineligible for transplant.

Funding

Celgene Ltd.

Development and Validation of an Algorithm to Identify Patients with Multiple Myeloma Using Administrative Claims Data

PURPOSE

The objective was to expand on prior work by developing and validating a new algorithm to identify multiple myeloma (MM) patients in administrative claims.

METHODS

Two files were constructed to select MM cases from MarketScan Oncology Electronic Medical Records (EMR) and controls from the MarketScan Primary Care EMR during January 1, 2000-March 31, 2014. Patients were linked to MarketScan claims databases, and files were merged. Eligible cases were age ≥18, had a diagnosis and visit for MM in the Oncology EMR, and were continuously enrolled in claims for ≥90 days preceding and ≥30 days after diagnosis. Controls were age ≥18, had ≥12 months of overlap in claims enrollment (observation period) in the Primary Care EMR and ≥1 claim with an ICD-9-CM diagnosis code of MM (203.0×) during that time. Controls were excluded if they had chemotherapy; stem cell transplant; or text documentation of MM in the EMR during the observation period. A split sample was used to develop and validate algorithms. A maximum of 180 days prior to and following each MM diagnosis was used to identify events in the diagnostic process. Of 20 algorithms explored, the baseline algorithm of 2 MM diagnoses and the 3 best performing were validated. Values for sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated.

CONCLUSION

Three claims-based algorithms were validated with ~10% improvement in PPV (87-94%) over prior work (81%) and the baseline algorithm (76%) and can be considered for future research. Consistent with prior work, it was found that MM diagnoses before and after tests were needed.

Expression Profiles of the Individual Genes Corresponding to the Genes Generated by Cytotoxicity Experiments with Bortezomib in Multiple Myeloma

OBJECTIVE

Multiple myeloma (MM) is currently incurable due to refractory disease relapse even under novel anti-myeloma treatment. In silico studies are effective for key decision making during clinicopathological battles against the chronic course of MM. The aim of this present in silico study was to identify individual genes whose expression profiles match that of the one generated by cytotoxicity experiments for bortezomib.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used an in silico literature mining approach to identify potential biomarkers by creating a summarized set of metadata derived from relevant information. The E-MTAB-783 dataset containing expression data from 789 cancer cell lines including 8 myeloma cell lines with drug screening data from the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute database obtained from ArrayExpress was "Robust Multi-array analysis" normalized using GeneSpring v.12.5. Drug toxicity data were obtained from the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer project. In order to identify individual genes whose expression profiles matched that of the one generated by cytotoxicity experiments for bortezomib, we used a linear regression-based approach, where we searched for statistically significant correlations between gene expression values and IC50 data. The intersections of the genes were identified in 8 cell lines and used for further analysis.

RESULTS

Our linear regression model identified 73 genes and some genes expression levels were found to very closely correlated with bortezomib IC50 values. When all 73 genes were used in a hierarchical cluster analysis, two major clusters of cells representing relatively sensitive and resistant cells could be identified. Pathway and molecular function analysis of all the significant genes was also investigated, as well as the genes involved in pathways.

CONCLUSION

The findings of our present in silico study could be important not only for the understanding of the genomics of MM but also for the better arrangement of the targeted anti-myeloma therapies, such as bortezomib.

Cost-effectiveness of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone vs. bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone in transplant-ineligible U.S. patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a cost-effectiveness assessment of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (Rd) vs bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone (VMP) as initial treatment for transplant-ineligible patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM), from a U.S. payer perspective.

METHODS

A partitioned survival model was developed to estimate expected life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), direct costs and incremental costs per QALY and LY gained associated with use of Rd vs VMP over a patient's lifetime. Information on the efficacy and safety of Rd and VMP was based on data from multinational phase III clinical trials and a network meta-analysis. Pre-progression direct costs included the costs of Rd and VMP, treatment of adverse events (including prophylaxis) and routine care and monitoring associated with MM. Post-progression direct costs included costs of subsequent treatment(s) and routine care and monitoring for progressive disease, all obtained from published literature and estimated from a U.S. payer perspective. Utilities were obtained from the aforementioned trials. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% annually.

RESULTS

Relative to VMP, use of Rd was expected to result in an additional 2.22 LYs and 1.47 QALYs (discounted). Patients initiated with Rd were expected to incur an additional $78,977 in mean lifetime direct costs (discounted) vs those initiated with VMP. The incremental costs per QALY and per LY gained with Rd vs VMP were $53,826 and $35,552, respectively. In sensitivity analyses, results were found to be most sensitive to differences in survival associated with Rd vs VMP, the cost of lenalidomide and the discount rate applied to effectiveness outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Rd was expected to result in greater LYs and QALYs compared with VMP, with similar overall costs per LY for each regimen. Results of this analysis indicated that Rd may be a cost-effective alternative to VMP as initial treatment for transplant-ineligible patients with MM, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio well within the levels for recent advancements in oncology.