Inotuzumab ozogamicin versus FLAG-Ida in the treatment of relapsed or refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia – real-world resource use data

Cost-Effectiveness of Inotuzumab Ozogamicin Compared to Standard of Care Chemotherapy for Treating Relapsed or Refractory Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia Patients in Norway and Sweden

“…A further limitation was the uncertainty around the time spent in the hospital while treated with InO or SoC. The hospitalisation duration is expected to vary in clinical practice, demonstrated through a recent study in the UK real-world setting showing InO patients had a vastly reduced hospitalisation duration in the real world (a median of 5 days) compared to that observed in the INO-VATE ALL trial [ 70 ]. Although the time spent in the hospital will likely vary between countries, lower real-world hospitalisation with InO has a strong downward effect on the ICER.…”

“…The final ICER versus SoC, upon which InO was recommended for use, was £37,497 per QALY gained (approximately €41,000) [ 19 , 71 ]. The NICE ICER differed slightly from our base case because of confidential UK data on drug costs and a greater real-world hospitalisation advantage for InO over SoC than was observed in INO-VATE ALL; these data would be expected to lower all ICERs for InO versus SoC should it be incorporated into our model [ 70 ].…”

Survival extrapolation models’ impact on cost-effectiveness assessments for reimbursement of oncolytics

“…No precise argumentation for this assumption was provided except for a general discussion on uncertainty around differences in long-term survival between the two treatment arms (18).TLV also applied a more conservative SMR than our base case, which reduced long-term survival post-HSCT. While we considered an SMR of 4 to already be conservative as transplantation (70). Although the time spent in the hospital will likely vary between countries, lower real-world hospitalisation with InO has a strong downward effect on the ICER.…”