Hegde Naveen C, Kumar Ankit, Kaundal Shaweta, Saha Lekha, Malhotra Pankaj, Prinja Shankar, Lad Deepesh, Patil Amol N
Department of Pharmacology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Department of Clinical Hematology & Medical Oncology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Ann Hematol. 2023 Nov;102(11):3125-3132. doi: 10.1007/s00277-023-05342-y. Epub 2023 Jul 13.
Though the chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) management options in India are still limited compared to the novel drug options in resource-rich settings, the availability of less costly generics and the government health insurance scheme has enabled many patients to access the newer drugs in India. The current study compared the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of existing initial management options for the progression-free survival (PFS) time horizon from the patient's perspective. A two-health-state, PFS and progressive disease, Markov model was assumed for three regimens (generics): ibrutinib monotherapy, bendamustine-rituximab (B-R), and rituximab-chlorambucil (RClb) used as the frontline treatment of CLL patients in India. All costs, utilization of services, and consequences data during the PFS period were collected from interviewing patients during follow-up visits. The transition probability (TP) and average PFS information were obtained from landmark published studies. EQ-5D-5L questionnaires were utilized to assess the quality of life (QoL). Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were measured during the PFS period. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were studied. Upon analysis, the entire monetary expense during the PFS time was ₹1581964 with ibrutinib, ₹171434 with B-R, and ₹91997 with RClb treatment arm. Pooled PFS and QALY gain was 10.33 and 8.28 years for ibrutinib, 4.08 and 3.53 years for the B-R regimen, and 1.33 and 1.23 years in RClb arms, respectively. Ibrutinib's ICER and ICUR were ₹214587.32 per PFS year gain and ₹282384.86 per QALY gain when assessed against the B-R regimen. Ibrutinib also performed better in ICER and ICUR against the RClb arm with ₹157014.29 per PFS year gain and ₹200413.6 per QALY gain. In conclusion, generic ibrutinib is a cost-effective initial line of management compared to other commonly used treatment regimes in resource-limited settings.
尽管与资源丰富地区的新型药物选择相比,印度慢性淋巴细胞白血病(CLL)的治疗选择仍然有限,但低成本仿制药的可及性和政府医疗保险计划使许多患者能够在印度获得更新的药物。本研究从患者角度比较了现有初始治疗方案在无进展生存期(PFS)时间范围内的成本效益和成本效用。针对三种治疗方案(仿制药):依鲁替尼单药治疗、苯达莫司汀-利妥昔单抗(B-R)和利妥昔单抗-苯丁酸氮芥(RClb),假定了一个包含PFS和进展性疾病两种健康状态的马尔可夫模型,用于印度CLL患者的一线治疗。在随访期间通过访谈患者收集PFS期间的所有成本、服务利用情况和结果数据。转移概率(TP)和平均PFS信息来自具有里程碑意义的已发表研究。使用EQ-5D-5L问卷评估生活质量(QoL)。在PFS期间测量质量调整生命年(QALY)。研究了增量成本效益比(ICER)和增量成本效用比(ICUR)。经分析,PFS期间依鲁替尼治疗的总费用为1581964卢比,B-R治疗为171434卢比,RClb治疗组为91997卢比。依鲁替尼组汇总的PFS和QALY增益分别为10.33年和8.28年,B-R方案为4.08年和3.53年,RClb组为1.33年和1.23年。与B-R方案相比,依鲁替尼的ICER和ICUR分别为每增加1年PFS收益为214587.32卢比,每增加1个QALY收益为282384.86卢比。与RClb组相比,依鲁替尼在ICER和ICUR方面也表现更好,每增加1年PFS收益为157014.29卢比,每增加1个QALY收益为200413.6卢比。总之,在资源有限的环境中,与其他常用治疗方案相比,仿制药依鲁替尼是一种具有成本效益的初始治疗方案。