Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Cancer. 2015 Aug 1;121(15):2637-45. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29372. Epub 2015 Apr 15.
A watch and wait (WW) strategy is the standard of care for patients with asymptomatic advanced-stage follicular lymphoma. Recent data have demonstrated an improvement in the time to progression with rituximab induction (RI) with or without rituximab maintenance (RM) in comparison with a WW strategy wait in such patients. It remains unclear whether this is a cost-effective strategy.
A Markov decision analysis model was developed to compare the clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of RI (4 weekly doses) plus RM (12 doses every 2 months), RI (4 weekly doses), and a WW strategy for patients newly diagnosed with low-burden, asymptomatic advanced-stage follicular lymphoma over a lifetime horizon. Baseline probabilities and utilities were derived from a systematic review of published studies, and they were evaluated on a 6-month cycle. A Canadian public health payer's perspective was adopted, and costs were presented in 2012 Canadian dollars.
RI was the cheapest strategy. It was less costly at $59,953 versus $67,489 for the RM arm and $75,895 for the WW arm. It was also associated with a slightly lower quality-adjusted life expectancy at 6.16 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus 6.28 QALYs for the RM strategy but was superior to WW (5.71 QALYs). In sensitivity analyses of key variables, this effectiveness was sensitive to the probability of first and second progression in the RI arm, and this indicated relatively neutral effectiveness between the 2 rituximab arms.
RI without maintenance for asymptomatic advanced-stage follicular lymphoma is the preferred strategy: it minimizes costs per patient over a lifetime horizon.
对于无症状的晚期滤泡性淋巴瘤患者,观察等待(WW)策略是标准的治疗方法。最近的数据表明,与 WW 策略相比,利妥昔单抗诱导(RI)加或不加利妥昔单抗维持(RM)可改善患者的无进展时间。但目前尚不清楚这是否是一种具有成本效益的策略。
我们开发了一个马尔可夫决策分析模型,以比较 RI(每周 4 次剂量)加 RM(每 2 个月 12 次剂量)、RI(每周 4 次剂量)和 WW 策略在终生范围内用于新诊断为低负担、无症状的晚期滤泡性淋巴瘤患者的临床结果、成本和成本效益。基线概率和效用来自对已发表研究的系统评价,每 6 个月评估一次。采用加拿大公共卫生付费者的观点,成本以 2012 年加元表示。
RI 是最便宜的策略。与 RM 组的$67,489 相比,它的成本较低,为$59,953,与 WW 组的$75,895 相比,它的成本也较低。它还与略低的质量调整生命预期相关,在 6.16 个质量调整生命年(QALYs)的质量调整生命年(QALYs)中,6.28 个 QALYs 用于 RM 策略,但优于 WW(5.71 个 QALYs)。在 RI 组中首次和第二次进展的概率等关键变量的敏感性分析中,这种效果对 RI 组的效果敏感,这表明两种利妥昔单抗治疗方案的效果相当。
对于无症状的晚期滤泡性淋巴瘤,不进行维持治疗的 RI 是首选策略:它可使患者在终生范围内的成本最小化。