Economic assessment in the management of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma

Gemcitabine/dexamethasone/cisplatin vs cytarabine/dexamethasone/cisplatin for relapsed or refractory aggressive-histology lymphoma: cost-utility analysis of NCIC CTG LY.12

BACKGROUND

The NCIC CTG LY.12 study showed that gemcitabine, dexamethasone, and cisplatin (GDP) were noninferior to dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin (DHAP) in patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive histology lymphoma prior to autologous stem cell transplantation. We conducted an economic evaluation from the perspective of the Canadian public healthcare system based on trial data.

METHODS

The primary outcome was an incremental cost utility analysis comparing costs and benefits associated with GDP vs DHAP. Resource utilization data were collected from 519 Canadian patients in the trial. Costs were presented in 2012 Canadian dollars and disaggregated to highlight the major cost drivers of care. Benefit was measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) based on utilities translated from prospectively collected quality-of-life data. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

The mean overall costs of treatment per patient in the GDP and DHAP arms were $19 961 (95% confidence interval (CI) = $17 286 to $24 565) and $34 425 (95% CI = $31 901 to $39 520), respectively, with an incremental difference in direct medical costs of $14 464 per patient in favor of GDP (P < .001). The predominant cost driver for both treatment arms was related to hospitalizations. The mean discounted quality-adjusted overall survival with GDP was 0.161 QALYs and 0.152 QALYs for DHAP (difference = 0.01 QALYs, P = .146). In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, GDP was associated with both cost savings and improved quality-adjusted outcomes compared with DHAP in 92.6% of cost-pair simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

GDP was associated with both lower costs and similar quality-adjusted outcomes compared with DHAP in patients with relapsed or refractory lymphoma. Considering both costs and outcomes, GDP was the dominant therapy.

Critical review of economic evaluations in multiple myeloma: an overview of the economic evidence and quality of the methodology

Continued expansion in the availability of costly alternative therapies in multiple myeloma will enhance the role of economic evaluations in reimbursement decisions and amendments to the treatment guidelines. The quality of economic evaluations should be taken into account by clinicians involved in decision-making. A systematic review and critique of the methodology was performed to assess the trends and quality in economic evaluations in multiple myeloma to date. A literature search was conducted to identify full economic evaluations in multiple myeloma as of December 2009. Details of the economic evaluation methods applied were extracted. Each study underwent a quality assessment based on the Drummond checklist for appraisal of high-quality economic evaluations in health care. Eighteen published economic evaluations were identified. Stem cell transplantation in combination with intensive chemotherapy has been demonstrated to be cost-effective, while interferon alpha is generally ineffective at additional costs. Evaluations have become less frequent in the last decade, especially for newer therapies despite their important contribution to improvements in outcomes. The quality of the methodology applied and its documentation can be improved in many aspects. As users of the results of economic evaluations, clinicians involved in guiding decision-making should be critical of the quality of economic evaluations in multiple myeloma. To ensure access to and identification of high-quality studies, researchers conducting economic evaluations of future advances should strive towards evaluations that fulfil the Drummond criteria and are properly documented.

Economic burden of follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

Follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (FNHL), a slow-growing cancer of the immune system, constitutes about 15-30% of all incident non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in developed countries. Its incidence is rising worldwide. Patients can live many years, but FNHL is considered incurable. We systematically reviewed the English-language MEDLINE-indexed and non-indexed economic literature published in the past 10 years on FNHL, identifying 23 primary economic studies. The economic burden of FNHL is significant, but available data are generally limited to retrospective considerations of hospital-based direct treatment costs, with little information available regarding societal cost of illness. Most direct cost information originates from the US, with one estimate of $US36 000 for the per-patient incremental cost of FNHL care during the first year following diagnosis. The most studied treatment is rituximab, which may offer similar overall costs to fludarabine considering higher resource use with fludarabine complications. Nearly all cost-effectiveness models identified by this review evaluated rituximab for relapsed/refractory FNHL responding to chemotherapy induction. Rituximab is supported as a cost-effective addition to standard chemotherapy by two models in the UK and one in the US, as maintenance therapy instead of stem-cell transplant by one UK model, and as maintenance therapy instead of observation alone by one model each in France, Spain and Canada. The UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence updated guidance on rituximab in February 2008, concluding that it is cost effective when added to induction chemotherapy, and when used as maintenance therapy. No studies of per-patient or national indirect costs of illness were identified, with the only study of indirect costs a Canadian survey documenting lost work productivity. Across all study types identified by our review, the most common focus was on the direct costs of rituximab. As new treatments for FNHL come to market, more real-life cost data are imperative to calculate their relative cost effectiveness.

Costs associated with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patient treatment in a Canadian integrated cancer care center

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to provide a detailed comparative microcosting analysis for two cancer treatment pathways to contribute evidence for resource allocation and operational decision-making in a Canadian cancer care context.

METHODS

We estimated direct medical costs (in 2004 CAN$) of the entire pathway of care for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients in a large Canadian cancer treatment center. Patient samples were defined as those who received R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone; n = 85) or CHOP (i.e., without rituximab; n = 86) as first-line treatment. All subsequent treatments including palliative care for these patient samples were assessed. Hospitalization costs and unit costs of medical resources were collected from integrated medical organizations. Individual patient resource consumption was assessed via medical chart review.

RESULTS

For first-line treatment, drug cost was the largest contributor to total cost, followed by hospitalization cost. Rituximab was the largest contributor to mean cost differences between R-CHOP and CHOP treatments. For treatments subsequent to first-line treatment, no significant cost differences were found. Hospitalization and transplantation costs were the two largest constituents of total costs subsequent to first-line treatment, followed by drug cost. Patients with advanced stage disease cost significantly more than patients with limited stage disease.

CONCLUSION

This is the first detailed microcosting study that has employed consistent local data to estimate total medical costs for DLBCL patients in Canada. This information is useful for resource allocation planning and operational decisions, because it provides more substantive, relevant evidence as compared to aggregated, literature or extrapolated information.

Economic assessment on the management of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia

In the last decade, several new promising treatments for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) have been developed. Healthcare costs are increasing and new treatments tend to be very expensive; therefore, information about the cost effectiveness in treatments for CLL is urgently needed. The authors performed a literature review on the currently available economic evaluations on CLL treatments. A total of 65 articles were found, of which 11 could be included. These articles were evaluated on the basis of six methodological requirements for economic evaluations, enabling readers to judge the value of the studies. Only a small amount of information was available on the costs of CLL treatments. Future economic evaluations should be performed according to the methodological requirements for these studies, which should also be properly documented.