TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effectiveness of lenalidomide plus rituximab versus rituximab monotherapy in patients with previously treated follicular lymphoma
T2 - a societal view
AU - Thielen, Frederick W.
AU - Kersten, Marie José
AU - Kuizenga, Pim
AU - Hoogendoorn, Mels
AU - Posthuma, Eduardus F.M.
AU - Stevens, Wendy B.C.
AU - A Uyl-de Groot, Carin
AU - Blommestein, Hedwig M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Introduction: Efficacy of lenalidomide plus rituximab (R-LEN) compared to rituximab monotherapy (R-mono) for patients with previously treated follicular lymphoma (FL) was investigated in AUGMENT (NCT01938001). Our aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of R-LEN versus R-mono in this setting from a Dutch perspective. Areas covered: Cost-effectiveness was assessed through a partitioned survival model from three perspectives (i.e. societal, healthcare, and societal, including future non-medical costs). Patient-level data from AUGMENT informed effectiveness parameters (i.e. long-term survival) and health state utilities. Resource use and prices were based on AUGMENT and the literature. Clinical experts validated efficacy input parameters and results. Uncertainty was explored through sensitivity and scenario analyses. Expert opinion: R-LEN resulted in 1.7 incremental discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Total incremental discounted costs were 67,161 EUR from a societal perspective. In conclusion, R-LEN was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 50,000 EUR/QALY in the base-case analyses(incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = 40,493 EUR/QALY). Scenario and sensitivity analyses indicated some level of uncertainty regarding this conclusion, depending on the chosen WTP-threshold and perspective.
AB - Introduction: Efficacy of lenalidomide plus rituximab (R-LEN) compared to rituximab monotherapy (R-mono) for patients with previously treated follicular lymphoma (FL) was investigated in AUGMENT (NCT01938001). Our aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of R-LEN versus R-mono in this setting from a Dutch perspective. Areas covered: Cost-effectiveness was assessed through a partitioned survival model from three perspectives (i.e. societal, healthcare, and societal, including future non-medical costs). Patient-level data from AUGMENT informed effectiveness parameters (i.e. long-term survival) and health state utilities. Resource use and prices were based on AUGMENT and the literature. Clinical experts validated efficacy input parameters and results. Uncertainty was explored through sensitivity and scenario analyses. Expert opinion: R-LEN resulted in 1.7 incremental discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Total incremental discounted costs were 67,161 EUR from a societal perspective. In conclusion, R-LEN was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 50,000 EUR/QALY in the base-case analyses(incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = 40,493 EUR/QALY). Scenario and sensitivity analyses indicated some level of uncertainty regarding this conclusion, depending on the chosen WTP-threshold and perspective.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85114243264&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/14737140.2021.1971520
DO - 10.1080/14737140.2021.1971520
M3 - Article
C2 - 34428992
AN - SCOPUS:85114243264
SN - 1473-7140
VL - 21
SP - 1411
EP - 1422
JO - Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy
JF - Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy
IS - 12
ER -