Pcn81 Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Bortezomib in Previously Untreated Multiple Myeloma Patients in Canada

Yoong, K.; Attard, Cheryl; Jivraj, Farah; Shustik, Chaim; Reece, Donna

doi:10.1016/s1098-3015(10)74332-1

Cited by 4 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[72][73][74][75][76] Of these evaluations, three compared MPT with MP 72,74,75 and two compared VMP with MPT and MP. 73,76 All three studies showed additional benefits from MPT compared with MP at additional cost, with cost per QALY gained ranging from £17,002 to £17,847 72,74 in the UK and being AUS$20,998 in Australia. 75 The two economic evaluations assessing VMP, MPT and MP showed that additional benefits were provided by VMP compared with MPT and by VMP and MPT compared with MP.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…75 The two economic evaluations assessing VMP, MPT and MP showed that additional benefits were provided by VMP compared with MPT and by VMP and MPT compared with MP. The studies showed ICERs ranging from CAN$48,294 73 to US$56,109 76 per QALY gained for VMP compared with MP and CAN$31,975 per QALY gained 73 and dominance 76 for VMP compared with MPT. All of the studies had the involvement of the manufacturer of the interventions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yoong and colleagues 73 estimated the cost-effectiveness of bortezomib in combination with MP (VMP) compared with MP and MPT in previously untreated people with MM in Canada who are unsuitable for SCT. Clinical outcomes originated from the VISTA study 26 for VMP compared with MP and from an unspecified indirect comparison of VMP and MPT.…”

Section: Systematic Review Of Existing Cost-effectiveness Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bortezomib and thalidomide in combination regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Picot

Cooper²,

Bryant³

et al. 2011

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How to obtain copies of this and other HTA programme reports An electronic version of this title, in Adobe Acrobat format, is available for downloading free of charge for personal use from the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk). A fully searchable DVD is also available (see below).Printed copies of HTA journal series issues cost £20 each (post and packing free in the UK) to both public and private sector purchasers from our despatch agents.Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per issue and for the rest of the world £3 per issue. How to order:-fax (with credit card details) -post (with credit card details or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you to either print out your order or download a blank order form. Contact details are as follows:Synergie UK (HTA Department) Digital House, The Loddon Centre Wade Road Basingstoke Hants RG24 8QW Email: orders@hta.ac.uk Tel: 0845 812 4000 -ask for 'HTA Payment Services' (out-of-hours answer-phone service) Fax: 0845 812 4001 -put 'HTA Order' on the fax header Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to University of Southampton and drawn on a bank with a UK address.Paying by credit card You can order using your credit card by phone, fax or post. SubscriptionsNHS libraries can subscribe free of charge. Public libraries can subscribe at a reduced cost of £100 for each volume (normally comprising 40-50 titles). The commercial subscription rate is £400 per volume (addresses within the UK) and £600 per volume (addresses outside the UK). Please see our website for details. Subscriptions can be purchased only for the current or forthcoming volume.How do I get a copy of HTA on DVD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd/index.shtml). HTA on DVD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA programme and lists the membership of the various committees. HTAThe clinical effectiveness and costeffectiveness of bortezomib and thalidomide in combination regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and economic evaluation NIHR Health Technology Assessment programmeThe Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care. The research findings from the HTA programme directly influence decision-making bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the National Screening Committee (NSC). HTA findings also help to improve the quality of clin...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Systematic Review Of Existing Cost-effectiveness Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bortezomib and thalidomide in combination regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Picot

Cooper²,

Bryant³

et al. 2011

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It found higher costs with bortezomib compared to thalidomide (Gaultney et al ., ). Conversely, several convenience‐sample studies (Richardson et al ., ; Yoong et al ., ; Picot et al ., ; Delforge et al ., ; Durie et al ., ; Garrison et al ., ; Teitelbaum et al ., ; Fragoulakis et al ., ,) suggested bortezomib cost effectiveness was similar to thalidomide and, in some cases, superior to lenalidomide. None of these studies reflected a real‐world, patient‐based cohort and all were limited by trial settings, significant pharmaceutical company involvement, small sample size or limited data presentation.…”

Section: Estimated Mean Australian Dollar (Aud) Yearly Costs By Treatmentioning

confidence: 99%

A costing study of bortezomib shows equivalence of its real‐world costs to conventional treatment

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Information about the costs in other currencies has been published only in abstract form. [67][68][69][70][71][72] However, there seems to be no substantial differences in the nominal price of these drugs across different currencies and countries; for example, the abstract by Hornberger et al [68] reported [65] b The cost of a 50-mg capsule is around h9 according to the Farmadati system. [65] c This range reflects the differences in cost related to whether the dose is £200 mg/d.…”

Section: Cost Of the Novel Anti-myeloma Agents And Preliminary Assessmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Bortezomib, Thalidomide and Lenalidomide in the Management of Multiple Myeloma

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bortezomib, thalidomide and lenalidomide can be aimed at treating patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (both eligible and ineligible for transplantation) as well as those with relapsed or refractory disease. This review analysed the available clinical and economic data on these three drugs. Irrespective of which of the three agents is considered, the magnitude of the benefit in newly diagnosed cases (transplanted or non-transplanted) tends to be between 10 and 20 months per patient in terms of progression-free survival or survival; the survival benefit is smaller in relapsed or refractory disease. In addition, a single-institution observational analysis evaluated the outcomes in nearly 3000 consecutive patients examined between 1971 and 2006. The survival in patients diagnosed between 2001 and 2006 was longer than that observed in patients diagnosed between 1994 and 2000. This finding supports the conclusion that novel agents provide a survival improvement compared with traditional therapy. Formal cost-effectiveness studies on these three agents are still lacking. A MEDLINE search retrieved only four short papers or letters and no full-length analysis. Hence, the cost effectiveness of these agents needs further investigation, with separate assessments of the different therapeutic settings. In a simplified analysis, we tried to contrast the average cost of treatment for each of the novel agents versus their respective benefit, expressed in quality-adjusted survival. Despite its preliminary nature, our assessment indicates that the cost effectiveness of these three agents is likely to be within commonly accepted pharmacoeconomic thresholds.

show abstract

Pcn81 Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Bortezomib in Previously Untreated Multiple Myeloma Patients in Canada

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bortezomib and thalidomide in combination regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bortezomib and thalidomide in combination regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

A costing study of bortezomib shows equivalence of its real‐world costs to conventional treatment

The Role of Bortezomib, Thalidomide and Lenalidomide in the Management of Multiple Myeloma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About