IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v37y2019i3d10.1007_s40273-018-0713-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ibrutinib for Treating Relapsed or Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Tappenden

    (University of Sheffield)

  • Emma Simpson

    (University of Sheffield)

  • Jean Hamilton

    (University of Sheffield)

  • Daniel Pollard

    (University of Sheffield)

  • Mark Clowes

    (University of Sheffield)

  • Eva Kaltenthaler

    (University of Sheffield)

  • David Meiklejohn

    (Ninewells Hospital)

  • Nick Morley

    (Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust)

Abstract

As part of its Single Technology Appraisal process, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of ibrutinib (Janssen) to submit evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of ibrutinib for the treatment of relapsed or refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). The School of Health and Related Research Technology Assessment Group at the University of Sheffield was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence contained within the company’s submission to NICE. The clinical effectiveness evidence for ibrutinib included one randomised controlled trial comparing ibrutinib and temsirolimus and two single-arm studies. The company’s indirect comparison of ibrutinib versus rituximab plus chemotherapy (R-chemo) produced a hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) of 0.28. The ERG’s random effects network meta-analysis (NMA) indicated that the treatment effect on PFS was highly uncertain (HR 0.27; 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.06–1.26). The company’s Markov model assessed the cost effectiveness of ibrutinib versus R-chemo for the treatment of R/R MCL from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services over a lifetime horizon. Based on a re-run of the company’s model by the ERG, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for ibrutinib versus R-chemo [including the company’s original patient access scheme (PAS)] was expected to be £76,014 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The ERG had several concerns regarding the company’s model structure and the evidence used to inform its parameters. The ERG’s preferred analysis, which used the ERG’s NMA and the observed Kaplan–Meier curve for time to ibrutinib discontinuation and excluded long-term disutilities for R-chemo, produced ICERs of £63,340 per QALY gained for the overall R/R MCL population and of £44,711 per QALY gained for patients with one prior treatment. Following an updated PAS and consideration of evidence from a later data-cut of the RAY trial, the appraisal committee concluded that the most plausible ICER for the one prior treatment subgroup was likely to be lower than the company’s estimate of £49,848 per QALY gained. The company’s ICER for the overall R/R MCL population was higher, at £62,650 per QALY gained. The committee recommended ibrutinib as an option for treating R/R MCL in adults only if they have received only one previous line of therapy and the company provides ibrutinib with the discount agreed in the commercial access agreement with NHS England.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Tappenden & Emma Simpson & Jean Hamilton & Daniel Pollard & Mark Clowes & Eva Kaltenthaler & David Meiklejohn & Nick Morley, 2019. "Ibrutinib for Treating Relapsed or Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 333-343, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:37:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-018-0713-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0713-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-018-0713-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-018-0713-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Unknown, 2016. "Department Publications 2014," Publications Lists 239845, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kaplan, Jonathan D. & Norton, Max & Baumgartner, Kendra, 2018. "An ounce of prevention and a pound of cure: the substitutability or complementarity of grapevine trunk disease management practices," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274361, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Hongxing Liu & Wendong Zhang & Elena Irwin & Jeffrey Kast & Noel Aloysius & Jay Martin & Margaret Kalcic, 2020. "Best Management Practices and Nutrient Reduction: An Integrated Economic-Hydrologic Model of the Western Lake Erie Basin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 96(4), pages 510-530.
    3. Evelina A. Zimovetz & Alain Joseph & Rajeev Ayyagari & Josephine A. Mauskopf, 2018. "A cost-effectiveness analysis of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in the treatment of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the UK," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(1), pages 21-35, January.
    4. Robert Koulish, 2016. "Using Risk to Assess the Legal Violence of Mandatory Detention," Laws, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-20, July.
    5. José Armando Cobián Álvarez & Budy P. Resosudarmo, 2019. "The cost of floods in developing countries’ megacities: a hedonic price analysis of the Jakarta housing market, Indonesia," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 21(4), pages 555-577, October.
    6. Marguerite DeLiema & Jeanine Yonashiro-Cho & Zach D Gassoumis & Yongjie Yon & Ken J Conrad, 2018. "Using Latent Class Analysis to Identify Profiles of Elder Abuse Perpetrators," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 73(5), pages 49-58.
    7. Marius Dan Gavriletea, 2017. "Environmental Impacts of Sand Exploitation. Analysis of Sand Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-26, June.
    8. D. Lee & A. Amadi & J. Sabater & J. Ellis & H. Johnson & S. Kotapati & S. McNamara & A. Walker & M. Cooper & K. Patterson & N. Roskell & Y. Meng, 2019. "Can We Accurately Predict Cost Effectiveness Without Access to Overall Survival Data? The Case Study of Nivolumab in Combination with Ipilimumab for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Melanoma in," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 43-54, March.
    9. Jelena Ruso & Ana Horvat & Milica Marièiæ, 2019. "Do international standards influence the development of smart regions and cities?," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 37(2), pages 629-652.
    10. Philipp Aerni, 2016. "Coping with Migration-Induced Urban Growth: Addressing the Blind Spot of UN Habitat," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-21, August.
    11. B Ian Hutchins & Xin Yuan & James M Anderson & George M Santangelo, 2016. "Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-25, September.
    12. BARCEVICIUS Egidijus & CIBAITE Guonda & CODAGNONE Cristiano & GINEIKYTE Vaida & KLIMAVICIUTE Luka & LIVA Giovanni & MATULEVIC Loreta & MISURACA Gianluca & VANINI Irene, 2019. "Exploring Digital Government transformation in the EU," JRC Research Reports JRC118857, Joint Research Centre.
    13. Gina Ziervogel & Anna Cowen & John Ziniades, 2016. "Moving from Adaptive to Transformative Capacity: Building Foundations for Inclusive, Thriving, and Regenerative Urban Settlements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-20, September.
    14. Manfred Spiesberger & Javier Gomez Prieto & Isabelle Seigneur, 2018. "Smart specialisation and social innovation: from policy relations to opportunities and challenges," JRC Research Reports JRC111371, Joint Research Centre.
    15. Kexi Pan & Yongfu Li & Hanxiong Zhu & Anrong Dang, 2017. "Spatial Configuration of Energy Consumption and Carbon Emissions of Shanghai, and Our Policy Suggestions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, January.
    16. Zornitsa Stoyanova & Ivelina Petkova & Kristina Todorova, 2018. "Risk Management Strategies in Water Projects in Bulgaria," Economic Alternatives, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria, issue 2, pages 228-238, June.
    17. Celene Y. L. Yap & Ya-seng (Arthur) Hsueh & Jonathan C. Knott & David McD Taylor & Esther W. Chan & David C. M. Kong, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Midazolam–Droperidol Combination, Versus Droperidol or Olanzapine for the Management of Acute Agitation in the Emergency Department: A Within-Trial Analysis," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 141-151, June.
    18. Hamrick, Karen S. & McClelland, Ket, 2016. "Americans' Eating Patterns and Time Spent on Food: The 2014 Eating & Health Module Data," Economic Information Bulletin 262141, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    19. Morgan, Kimberly L. & Interis, Matthew G., 2017. "Who Buys More Directly from Producers in the Southeastern United States? A Research Note," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 48(2), July.
    20. Claire Greene & Scott Schuh, 2017. "The 2016 Diary of Consumer Payment Choice," Research Data Report 17-7, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pharme:v:37:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-018-0713-7. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.