Abstract
We compared the three arms of the MM-015 randomized phase III clinical trial [melphalan and prednisone (MP), MP plus lenalidomide (MPR), and MPR plus lenalidomide maintenance (MPR-R)] to determine whether the addition of lenalidomide maintenance therapy for primary treatment of multiple myeloma is cost-effective. We used progression-free survival and adverse event data from the MM-015 study for the analysis. Two novel measures of cost-effectiveness termed the Average Cumulative Cost per Patient (ACCP) and the Average Cumulative Cost per Progression-Free Survivor (ACCPFS) were developed for the purpose of this analysis. The ACCP of MP was USD 18,218, compared to USD 167,862 for MPR and USD 309,173 for MPR-R. The ACCPFS was highest with MPR at USD 1,555,443, while MP was USD 313,592 and MPR-R was USD 690,111. MPR-R is superior to MPR in terms of preventing the first progression after initial therapy. However, the addition of lenalidomide to MP in the induction and also in the maintenance setting leads to significant costs.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 224-231 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Oncology (Switzerland) |
| Volume | 87 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Nov 7 2014 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Cost-effectiveness
- Lenalidomide
- Maintenance
- Multiple myeloma
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Cancer Research
- Oncology
- Medicine(all)
Cite this
Pharmacoeconomic implications of lenalidomide maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma. / Kim, Miriam Y.; Sposto, Richard; Swaika, Abhisek; Asano, Hitomi; Alamgir, Ahsan; Chanan Khan, Asher A; Ailawadhi, Sikander.
In: Oncology (Switzerland), Vol. 87, No. 4, 07.11.2014, p. 224-231.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Pharmacoeconomic implications of lenalidomide maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma
AU - Kim, Miriam Y.
AU - Sposto, Richard
AU - Swaika, Abhisek
AU - Asano, Hitomi
AU - Alamgir, Ahsan
AU - Chanan Khan, Asher A
AU - Ailawadhi, Sikander
PY - 2014/11/7
Y1 - 2014/11/7
N2 - We compared the three arms of the MM-015 randomized phase III clinical trial [melphalan and prednisone (MP), MP plus lenalidomide (MPR), and MPR plus lenalidomide maintenance (MPR-R)] to determine whether the addition of lenalidomide maintenance therapy for primary treatment of multiple myeloma is cost-effective. We used progression-free survival and adverse event data from the MM-015 study for the analysis. Two novel measures of cost-effectiveness termed the Average Cumulative Cost per Patient (ACCP) and the Average Cumulative Cost per Progression-Free Survivor (ACCPFS) were developed for the purpose of this analysis. The ACCP of MP was USD 18,218, compared to USD 167,862 for MPR and USD 309,173 for MPR-R. The ACCPFS was highest with MPR at USD 1,555,443, while MP was USD 313,592 and MPR-R was USD 690,111. MPR-R is superior to MPR in terms of preventing the first progression after initial therapy. However, the addition of lenalidomide to MP in the induction and also in the maintenance setting leads to significant costs.
AB - We compared the three arms of the MM-015 randomized phase III clinical trial [melphalan and prednisone (MP), MP plus lenalidomide (MPR), and MPR plus lenalidomide maintenance (MPR-R)] to determine whether the addition of lenalidomide maintenance therapy for primary treatment of multiple myeloma is cost-effective. We used progression-free survival and adverse event data from the MM-015 study for the analysis. Two novel measures of cost-effectiveness termed the Average Cumulative Cost per Patient (ACCP) and the Average Cumulative Cost per Progression-Free Survivor (ACCPFS) were developed for the purpose of this analysis. The ACCP of MP was USD 18,218, compared to USD 167,862 for MPR and USD 309,173 for MPR-R. The ACCPFS was highest with MPR at USD 1,555,443, while MP was USD 313,592 and MPR-R was USD 690,111. MPR-R is superior to MPR in terms of preventing the first progression after initial therapy. However, the addition of lenalidomide to MP in the induction and also in the maintenance setting leads to significant costs.
KW - Cost-effectiveness
KW - Lenalidomide
KW - Maintenance
KW - Multiple myeloma
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904535317&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84904535317&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1159/000364880
DO - 10.1159/000364880
M3 - Article
C2 - 25059308
AN - SCOPUS:84904535317
VL - 87
SP - 224
EP - 231
JO - Oncology
JF - Oncology
SN - 0030-2414
IS - 4
ER -