Author
Listed:
- Jyoti Dixit
(Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER))
- Pankaj Malhotra
(Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER))
- Nikita Mehra
(Adyar Cancer Institute)
- Anisha Mathew
(All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS))
- Lalit Kumar
(All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS))
- Ashish Singh
(Christian Medical College)
- Nidhi Gupta
(Government Medical College and Hospital)
- Manjunath Nookala Krishnamurthy
(Tata Memorial Centre)
- Partha Sarathi Roy
(Dr. B. Booroah Cancer Institute)
- Amal Chandra Kataki
(Dr. B. Booroah Cancer Institute)
- Sudeep Gupta
(Tata Memorial Centre)
- Shankar Prinja
(Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER))
Abstract
Background Survival outcomes for multiple myeloma have improved dramatically since the introduction of novel therapeutic agents. While these drugs are highly effective in improving survival outcomes and quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma, they come at a significant cost. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of bortezomib-based triplet or quadruplet drug regimens in isolation and followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) in the Indian context. Methods A Markov model was developed to assess the health and economic outcomes of novel drug regimens with and without AHSCT for the treatment of NDMM in India. We estimated the lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs in each scenario. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed and compared against the current willingness-to-pay threshold of a one-time per capita gross domestic product of ₹146,890 (US$1,927.70) for India. Parameter uncertainty was assessed through Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results Among seven treatment sequences, the VCd (bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, dexamethasone) alone arm has the lowest cost and health benefits as compared to four treatment sequences, namely VTd (bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone) alone, VRd (bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone) alone, VRd plus AHSCT and DVRd (Daratumumab, bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone) plus AHSCT. It was found that VTd plus AHSCT and VCd plus AHSCT arms were extendedly dominated (ED) by combination of two alternative treatments. Among the five non-dominated strategies, VRd has a lowest incremental cost of ₹ 2,20,093 (US$2,888) per QALY gained compared to VTd alone followed by VRd plus AHSCT [₹3,14,530 (US$4,128) per QALY gained] in comparison to VRd alone. None of the novel treatment sequences were found to be cost-effective at the current WTP threshold of ₹1,46,890 (US$1,927.7). Conclusion At the current WTP threshold of one-time per capita GDP (₹ 146,890) of India, VRd alone and VRd plus AHSCT has 38.1% and 6.9% probability to be cost-effective, respectively. Reduction in current reimbursement rates of novel drugs, namely VRd, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide plus dexamethasone under national insurance program and societal cost of transplant by 50%, would make VRd plus AHSCT and VTd plus AHSCT cost-effective at an incremental cost of ₹40,671 (US$34) and ₹97,639 (US$1,281) per QALY gained, respectively.
Suggested Citation
Jyoti Dixit & Pankaj Malhotra & Nikita Mehra & Anisha Mathew & Lalit Kumar & Ashish Singh & Nidhi Gupta & Manjunath Nookala Krishnamurthy & Partha Sarathi Roy & Amal Chandra Kataki & Sudeep Gupta & Sh, 2024.
"Cost-Effectiveness of Novel Agent Regimens for Transplant-Eligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients in India,"
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 569-582, July.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00877-1
DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00877-1
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00877-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.