Purpose Since 2000, many new treatment options have become available for relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM) after a long period in which dexamethasone and melphalan had been the standard treatment. Direct comparisons of these novel treatments, however, are lacking. This makes it extremely difficult to evaluate the relative added value of each new treatment. Our aim was to synthesize all efficacy evidence, enabling a comparison of all current treatments for R/R MM. Methods We performed a systematic literature review to identify all publicly available phase III randomized controlled trial evidence. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, and the Web site www.ClinicalTrials.gov . In addition, two trials presented at two international hematology congresses (ie, ASCO 2016 and European Hematology Association 2016) were added to include the most recent evidence. In total, 17 randomized controlled trials were identified, including 18 treatment options. The evidence was synthesized using a conventional network meta-analysis. To include all treatments within one network, two treatment options were combined: (1) bortezomib monotherapy and bortezomib plus dexamethasone, and (2) thalidomide monotherapy and thalidomide plus dexamethasone. Results The combination of daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone was identified as the best treatment. It was most favorable in terms of (1) hazard ratio for progression-free survival (0.13; 95% credible interval, 0.09 to 0.19), and (2) probability of being best (99% of the simulations). This treatment combination reduced the risk of progression or death by 87% versus dexamethasone, 81% versus bortezomib plus dexamethasone, and 63% versus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone. Conclusion Our network meta-analysis provides a complete overview of the relative efficacy of all available treatments for R/R MM. Until additional data from randomized studies are available, on the basis of this analysis, the combination of daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone seems to be the best treatment option.

Our patient-level model enabled to study the effects and costs of entire treatment sequences and to compare real-world treatment patterns over time. Increased utilisation of novel agents improved survival and increased costs for real-world patients with MM in the Netherlands.

Decision makers increasingly request evidence on the real-world cost effectiveness of a new treatment. There is, however, a lack of practical guidance on how to conduct an economic evaluation based on registry data and how this evidence can be used in actual decision making. This paper explains the required steps on how to perform a sound economic evaluation using examples from an economic evaluation conducted with real-world data from the Dutch Population based HAematological Registry for Observational Studies. There are three main issues related to using registry data: confounding by indication, missing data, and insufficient numbers of (comparable) patients. If encountered, it is crucial to accurately deal with these issues to maximize the internal validity and generalizability of the outcomes and their value to decision makers. Multivariate regression modeling, propensity score matching, and data synthesis are well-established methods to deal with confounding. Multiple imputation methods should be used in cases where data are missing at random. Furthermore, it is important to base the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of a new treatment compared with its alternative on comparable groups of (matched) patients, even if matching results in a small analytical population. Unmatched real-world data provide insights into the costs and effects of a treatment in a real-world setting. Decision makers should realize that real-world evidence provides extremely valuable and relevant policy information, but needs to be assessed differently compared with evidence derived from a randomized clinical trial.

It is crucial to set up an efficient patient registry that serves its aims by collecting the right data of the right patient in the right way. It can be expected that patient registries will become the new standard alongside randomized controlled trials due to their unique value.

The aim of this study was to calculate the costs of the current initial treatment of acute myeloid leukemia. Resource use was collected for 202 patients who started with intensive chemotherapy in 2008 or 2009. The costs of the first induction course were significantly higher than the costs of the second induction course. Allogeneic transplantation from a matched unrelated donor was significantly more expensive than the other consolidation treatments. In-hospital stay was the major cost driver in the treatment of AML. Research regarding possibilities of achieving the same or better health outcome with lower costs is warranted.

Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT) is an expensive lifesaving procedure, which is increasingly performed in patients with haematological diseases. Developments in the protocol for SCT have resulted in cost estimates that require updating. We aimed to calculate actual costs for SCT and to identify major cost drivers by means of a daily practice cost study. We randomly selected 191 patients, treated at three university hospitals, who underwent an autologous (auto) SCT or allogeneic (allo) SCT in 2007, 2008 or 2009. Allo-SCT included sibling donors, matched unrelated donors (MUD) and umbilical cord blood (UCB). Resource use was collected from the hospital registration systems and medical files. The total costs included selection and harvesting of stem cells, transplantation and 1-year follow-up. The average costs per patient were 45,670 € for auto-SCT and 101,919 € for sibling allo-SCT. The costs of transplantations from unrelated donors were much higher: 171,478 € for allo-SCT-MUD and 254,689 € for allo-SCT-UCB. Hospital inpatient days together with laboratory and other activities were the main cost drivers across all types of SCT. Besides, donor search costs were a large cost component in allo-SCT-sib (18 %) and allo-SCT-MUD (12 %). Real-world costs were above routine reimbursement and appropriate financing is necessary to guarantee the continuation of SCT. The costs calculated in this study provide reliable up-to-date input for cost-effectiveness studies and budget revision.

Aim Technological and computational advancements offer new tools for the collection and analysis of real-world data (RWD). Considering the substantial effort and resources devoted to collecting RWD, a greater return would be achieved if real-world evidence (RWE) was effectively used to support Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and decision making on medical technologies. A useful question is: To what extent are RWD suitable for generating RWE? Methods We mapped existing RWD sources in Europe for three case studies: hip and knee arthroplasty, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and mitral valve repair (TMVR), and robotic surgery procedures. We provided a comprehensive assessment of their content and appropriateness for conducting the HTA of medical devices. The identification of RWD sources was performed combining a systematic search on PubMed with gray literature scoping, covering fifteen European countries. Results We identified seventy-one RWD sources on arthroplasties; ninety-five on TAVI and TMVR; and seventy-seven on robotic procedures. The number, content, and integrity of the sources varied dramatically across countries. Most sources included at least one health outcome (97.5%), with mortality and rehospitalization/reoperation the most common; 80% of sources included resource outcomes, with length of stay the most common, and comparators were available in almost 70% of sources. Conclusions RWD sources bear the potential for the HTA of medical devices. The main challenges are data accessibility, a lack of standardization of health and economic outcomes, and inadequate comparators. These findings are crucial to enabling the incorporation of RWD into decision making and represent a readily available tool for getting acquainted with existing information sources.

Although differences in real-world and trial population were found, using real-world data as well as results from long-term trial follow-up showed favourable ICERs for rituximab maintenance. Nevertheless, results showed that caution is required with data synthesis, interpretation and generalisability of results. As different scenarios provide answers to different questions, we recommend healthcare decision-makers to recognise the importance of calculating several cost-effectiveness scenarios.