Bendamustine-rituximab: a cost-utility analysis in first-line treatment of indolent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in England and Wales

Dewilde, Sarah; Woods, Beth; Castaigne, Jean‐Gabriel; Parker, Christopher; Dunlop, W.

doi:10.3111/13696998.2013.873044

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it could be Worthing to mention conclusions from a previous cost-utility analysis which assessed R-B therapy in England and Wales [20]. R-B first-line resulted in a cost-effective strategy compared to R-CHOP for treatment of indolent NHL, and this benefit was mainly due to the better toxicity profile of R-B.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Utility values used to calculate QALYs from the estimated survival were collected from scientific literature, 0.805 for PFS state, and 0.618 for progression state they were obtained through VAS by the EQ-5D questionnaire in 222 patients with FL from UK. [19,20]. The utility values were directly applied to the PFS and PD health states in the model.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Bendamustine Plus Rituximab as a First-Line Treatment for Patients with Follicular Lymphoma in Spain

Sabater

López‐Guillermo

Rueda

et al. 2016

Appl Health Econ Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Bendamustine Plus Rituximab as a First-Line Treatment for Patients with Follicular Lymphoma in Spain

Sabater

López‐Guillermo

Rueda

et al. 2016

Appl Health Econ Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the ICERs were $20,000–30,000 per QALY gained for first-line R-chemotherapy regimens compared with chemotherapy alone (30, 45, 46), for first-line bendamustine with rituximab compared with R-chemotherapy (47), and for MR compared with observation for relapsed FL (32, 48). Despite differences in model settings, costs, and health systems between countries, these studies revealed a similar magnitude of ICERs for these treatment strategies for indolent lymphoma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Cost-Effectiveness of Rituximab Maintenance and Radioimmunotherapy Consolidation versus Observation Following First-Line Therapy in Patients with Follicular Lymphoma

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES Phase 3 randomized trials have shown that rituximab maintenance (MR) therapy or radio-immunotherapy (RIT) consolidation following frontline therapy can improve progression-free survival for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL), but the cost-effectiveness of these approaches with respect to observation has not been examined using a common modeling framework. METHODS We developed Markov models to estimate patients’ lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and life years (LYs) after MR, RIT, and observation following frontline FL treatment from the US payer’s perspective. Progression risks, adverse event probabilities, costs, and utilities were estimated from clinical data of PRIMA, ECOG trial (for MR) and FIT trial (for RIT), and the published literature. We evaluated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for direct comparisons between MR/RIT and observation. Model robustness was addressed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS Compared with observation, MR provided additional 1.089 QALYs (1.099 LYs) and 1.399 QALYs (1.391 LYs) based on PRIMA and ECOG trials respectively, and RIT provided additional 1.026 QALYs (1.034 LYs). The incremental cost per QALY-gained was $40,335 (PRIMA) or $37,412 (ECOG) for MR, and $40,851 for RIT. MR and RIT had comparable incremental QALYs before first progression, while RIT had higher incremental costs of adverse events due to higher incidences of cytopenias. CONCLUSIONS MR and RIT following frontline FL therapy demonstrated favorable and similar cost-effectiveness profiles. The model results should be interpreted within the specific clinical settings of each trial. Selection of MR, RIT, or observation should be based on patient characteristics and expected tradeoffs for these alternatives.

show abstract

“…When compared to CHOPR or CVPR regimens, the BR was found to be cost-effective, and due to its more favourable toxicity profile it incurred lower costs related to AE management [33]. …”

Section: Bendamustine Safety Profilementioning

confidence: 99%

Bendamustine-based therapy as first-line treatment for non-Hodgkin lymphoma

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, bendamustine has become an important agent in the treatment for patients with lymphoid malignancies. Although the drug has received approval for second-line therapy in indolent lymphoma, a growing body of evidence suggests its efficacy and safety in first-line use. The results of randomised and observational studies with bendamustine as front-line therapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) with emphasis on efficacy and toxicity are presented. Furthermore, completed and ongoing clinical trials evaluating upfront bendamustine effectiveness in combination with other agents are discussed. The review refers mainly to indolent lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma and aggressive lymphoma, as the most commonly diagnosed NHL types. Finally, we elaborated on the safety profile of bendamustine and the perspectives of using the drug as a first-line therapy.

show abstract

Bendamustine-rituximab: a cost-utility analysis in first-line treatment of indolent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in England and Wales

Abstract: The ICERs for B-R vs CHOP-R and CVP-R were considerably below the thresholds normally regarded as cost-effective in England and Wales (£20,000-30,000 per QALY).

Cited by 13 publications

References 21 publications

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Bendamustine Plus Rituximab as a First-Line Treatment for Patients with Follicular Lymphoma in Spain

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Bendamustine Plus Rituximab as a First-Line Treatment for Patients with Follicular Lymphoma in Spain

Comparing the Cost-Effectiveness of Rituximab Maintenance and Radioimmunotherapy Consolidation versus Observation Following First-Line Therapy in Patients with Follicular Lymphoma

Bendamustine-based therapy as first-line treatment for non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About