Cost-effectiveness analysis of defibrotide in the treatment of patients with severe veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstructive syndrome with multiorgan dysfunction following hematopoietic cell transplantation in Spain

Hepatic veno-occlusive disease complicated with extreme hyperammonaemia (920 µmol/L) treated with defibrotide, lactulose, rifampin and haemodialysis

Hepatic veno-occlusive disease (VOD)/sinusoidal obstructive syndrome (SOS) is a severe complication that can occur following haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) with high-intensity conditioning chemotherapy regimens. Severe VOD/SOS, often characterised by multiorgan failure, is associated with a high mortality rate. This case report details the complex clinical course of a male patient in his mid-20s, recently diagnosed with B cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, who underwent allogeneic HSCT. Based on the 2023 European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) criteria, the patient developed very severe VOD/SOS, prompting immediate treatment with defibrotide. Unexpectedly, he developed profound hyperammonaemia exceeding 900 µmol/L, leading to encephalopathy and cerebral oedema. Despite aggressive interventions including defibrotide, lactulose, rifampin and haemodialysis, the patient passed away due to cerebral oedema and pulseless electrical activity arrest. We theorise the hyperammonaemia is disproportionate to his hepatic dysfunction and is possibly secondary to an acquired defect of the urea synthesis consistent with idiopathic hyperammonaemia, a rare complication in patients receiving intense conditioning chemotherapy.

Low Incidence of hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/veno-occlusive disease in adults undergoing allogenic stem cell transplantation with prophylactic ursodiol and low-dose heparin

Hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS)/veno-occlusive disease (VOD) is a complication after allogenic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) with high mortality. The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence and outcome of SOS in patients after allo-HSCT with the impact of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) and low-dose heparin as SOS prophylaxis. Out of 1016 patients, 23 developed SOS, with a cumulative incidence of 2.3% (95% CI 1.3-3.3) 6 months after HSCT. Approximately one quarter of these patients (26.1%) had late-onset SOS. A high proportion were very severe SOS cases (74%), and 83% of the patients were treated with defibrotide (DF). In multivariate analysis, advanced disease (p = 0.003), previous HSCT (p = 0.025) and graft versus host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis by post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) (p = 0.055) were associated with the development of SOS. The 1-year overall survival (OS) was significantly lower in the SOS group compared to patients without SOS (13% versus 70%, p = 0.0001). In conclusion, we found a low incidence of SOS in patients receiving low-dose heparin and UDCA prophylactically, but among SOS patients, a high mortality. Low-dose heparin and UDCA might be a prophylactic approach for SOS.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the first-line EGFR-TKIs in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer

AIM

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line treatments, such as erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib, dacomitinib, and osimertinib, for patients diagnosed with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A partitioned survival model was developed to estimate quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. Two Bayesian NMAs were performed independently, by using the polynomial fraction method to fit Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival and progression-free survival. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the uncertainty.

RESULTS

The ICER was calculated for the four first-line treatments by comparing them with gefitinib, and the ratios obtained were as follows: €166,416/QALY for osimertinib, €183,682/QALY for dacomitinib, €167,554/QALY for afatinib, €36,196/QALY for erlotinib. It was seen that patients who received osimertinib presented higher QALYs (0.49), followed by dacomitinib (0.33), afatinib (0.32), erlotinib (0.31), and gefitinib (0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Gefitinib is the most cost-effective treatment. In terms of QALYs gained, Osimertinib was more effective than all other TKIs. Nevertheless, with a Spanish threshold of €24,000/QALY, the reduction in the acquisition cost of osimertinib will have to be greater than 70%, to obtain a cost-effectiveness alternative.