Long-Term Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Multiple Myeloma Treatment Strategies for Elderly Transplant-Ineligible Patients in Serbia

Overview

Journal Zdr Varst

Publisher Sciendo

Specialty Public Health

Date 2020 Sep 21

PMID 32952707

Authors

durda Vukicevic

Ursula Rochau

Aleksandar Savic

Monika Schaffner

Milica Jevdevic

Igor Stojkov

Gaby Sroczynski

Wolfgang Willenbacher

Beate Jahn

Uwe Siebert

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Evidence on long-term effectiveness and cost effectiveness of treatment sequences for multiple myeloma (MM) is sparse. We used published data and country-specific data to assess the cost effectiveness of four-line treatment sequences for elderly transplant-ineligible patients with MM in Serbia.

Method: We developed a Markov cohort model to compare long-term effectiveness and cost effectiveness of five sequential MM treatment alternatives from the perspective of the national healthcare provider. Effectiveness parameters on progression, mortality and adverse events were extracted from published clinical trials. Costs were based on price lists of the National Health Insurance Fund. We compared life expectancy, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios among alternative courses of action. The model was analyzed over a lifelong time horizon applying a 3% annual discount rate for effectiveness outcomes and costs. Robustness of the model was tested in multiple deterministic sensitivity analyses.

Results: The sequences were defined by the frontline treatment: MPT (melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide), MPV (melphalanprednisone-bortezomib), CTD (cyclophosphamide-thalidomide-dexamethasone), VCD (bortezomib-cyclophosphamidedexamethasone) and BP (bendamustine-prednisone). MPV sequence resulted in the highest remaining life expectancy (4.76 life years). Cost-effectiveness analysis resulted in three non-dominated strategies: MPT, VCD, and MPV sequences, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR 35,300 per life-year gained (LYG) for VCD and EUR 47,200/LYG for MPV relative to MPT.

Conclusion: MPV sequence was the most effective in terms of life expectancy for elderly transplant-ineligible MM patients in Serbia. Bortezomib-based strategies would be recommended for the frontline treatment of patients with MM in Serbia if the willingness-to-pay threshold is around EUR 35,000-60,000/LYG.

References

. Multiple myeloma: 2018 update on diagnosis, risk‐stratification, and management. Am J Hematol. 2018; 93(8):981-1114. PMC: 6223128. DOI: 10.1002/ajh.25117. View

Kazandjian D . Multiple myeloma epidemiology and survival: A unique malignancy. Semin Oncol. 2017; 43(6):676-681. PMC: 5283695. DOI: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2016.11.004. View

Siebert U . Using decision-analytic modelling to transfer international evidence from health technology assessment to the context of the German health care system. GMS Health Technol Assess. 2011; 1:Doc03. PMC: 3011312. View

Stadtmauer E, Weber D, Niesvizky R, Belch A, Prince M, San Miguel J . Lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone at first relapse in comparison with its use as later salvage therapy in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Eur J Haematol. 2009; 82(6):426-32. PMC: 2704925. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0609.2009.01257.x. View

Petrucci M, Levi A, Bringhen S, Scotti S, Gentilini F, Russo S . Bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone in elderly patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a multicenter, open label phase 1/2 study. Cancer. 2012; 119(5):971-7. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27820. View

Kumar S, Therneau T, Gertz M, Lacy M, Dispenzieri A, Rajkumar S . Clinical course of patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Mayo Clin Proc. 2004; 79(7):867-74. DOI: 10.4065/79.7.867. View

Palumbo A, Bringhen S, Liberati A, Caravita T, Falcone A, Callea V . Oral melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide in elderly patients with multiple myeloma: updated results of a randomized controlled trial. Blood. 2008; 112(8):3107-14. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2008-04-149427. View

Smith D, Gravelle H . The practice of discounting in economic evaluations of healthcare interventions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001; 17(2):236-43. DOI: 10.1017/s0266462300105094. View

Dadacaridou M, Papanicolaou X, Maltesas D, Megalakaki C, Patos P, Panteli K . Dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide and cisplatin (DCEP) for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients. J BUON. 2007; 12(1):41-4. View

10.

Chhatwal J, Mathisen M, Kantarjian H . Are high drug prices for hematologic malignancies justified? A critical analysis. Cancer. 2015; 121(19):3372-9. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29512. View

11.

Hjorth M, Hjertner O, Knudsen L, Gulbrandsen N, Holmberg E, Pedersen P . Thalidomide and dexamethasone vs. bortezomib and dexamethasone for melphalan refractory myeloma: a randomized study. Eur J Haematol. 2012; 88(6):485-96. PMC: 3492844. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0609.2012.01775.x. View

12.

Kropff M, Bisping G, Schuck E, Liebisch P, Lang N, Hentrich M . Bortezomib in combination with intermediate-dose dexamethasone and continuous low-dose oral cyclophosphamide for relapsed multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2007; 138(3):330-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2007.06656.x. View

13.

Palumbo A, Hajek R, Delforge M, Kropff M, Petrucci M, Catalano J . Continuous lenalidomide treatment for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366(19):1759-69. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1112704. View

14.

Ponisch W, Rozanski M, Goldschmidt H, Hoffmann F, Boldt T, Schwarzer A . Combined bendamustine, prednisolone and thalidomide for refractory or relapsed multiple myeloma after autologous stem-cell transplantation or conventional chemotherapy: results of a Phase I clinical trial. Br J Haematol. 2008; 143(2):191-200. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2008.07076.x. View

15.

Eddy D, Hollingworth W, Caro J, Tsevat J, McDonald K, Wong J . Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7. Med Decis Making. 2012; 32(5):733-43. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X12454579. View

16.

Mateos M, Richardson P, Schlag R, Khuageva N, Dimopoulos M, Shpilberg O . Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone compared with melphalan and prednisone in previously untreated multiple myeloma: updated follow-up and impact of subsequent therapy in the phase III VISTA trial. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(13):2259-66. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.0638. View

17.

Morgan G, Davies F, Gregory W, Russell N, Bell S, Szubert A . Cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTD) as initial therapy for patients with multiple myeloma unsuitable for autologous transplantation. Blood. 2011; 118(5):1231-8. PMC: 3152492. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2011-02-338665. View

18.

de Weerdt O, van de Donk N, Veth G, Bloem A, Hagenbeek A, Lokhorst H . Continuous low-dose cyclophosphamide-prednisone is effective and well tolerated in patients with advanced multiple myeloma. Neth J Med. 2001; 59(2):50-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0300-2977(01)00140-1. View

19.

Palumbo A, Avonto I, Bruno B, Ambrosini M, Bringhen S, Cavallo F . Intravenous melphalan, thalidomide and prednisone in refractory and relapsed multiple myeloma. Eur J Haematol. 2006; 76(4):273-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0609.2005.00610.x. View

20.

Hajek R, Masszi T, Petrucci M, Palumbo A, Rosinol L, Nagler A . A randomized phase III study of carfilzomib vs low-dose corticosteroids with optional cyclophosphamide in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (FOCUS). Leukemia. 2016; 31(1):107-114. PMC: 5220126. DOI: 10.1038/leu.2016.176. View