Rituximab induction therapy has the highest probability of cost effectiveness in treating newly diagnosed patients with asymptomatic advanced follicular lymphoma, according to a study published in the British Journal of Haematology.
Rituximab induction therapy has the highest probability of cost effectiveness in treating newly diagnosed patients with asymptomatic advanced follicular lymphoma, according to a study published in the British Journal of Haematology.
The researchers estimated the cost-effectiveness of an active treatment strategy with rituximab to watchful waiting. While a previous study analyzed treatment choices in the Canadian health care system, this is the first known UK model that investigates treatment approaches.
Patients included in the study had asymptomatic follicular lymphoma and were deciding between active treatment utilizing rituximab or watchful waiting. If a patient experienced a relapse after active treatment, then he or she would be given another chemotherapy regimen with or without rituximab or an autologous transplantation. A randomized trial of the 3 treatment choices demonstrated no significant difference in survival rates.
Watchful waiting, rituximab induction, and maintenance costs were estimated using dosages and unit costs from the British National Formulary (BNF). Patients who chose watchful waiting—54%—required new treatment within 3 years. Patients treated with rituximab induction had an 11% chance of needing continued treatment after 3 years, while 19% of patients who received induction with rituximab followed by maintenance needed new treatment after 3 years. Annual recurrence rates were converted to 22.8%, 6.7% and 3.9%, respectively.
At follow-up visits, patients underwent physical examinations in which clinicians assessed symptoms and performed tests, such as a full blood count, liver and renal function assessment, and immunoglobin profile. Patients who experienced a recurrence were generally treated with immunochemotherapy. Costs for these tests and procedures were sourced from the National Health Service Reference costs.
Quality of life was measured based on an unpublished Oxford Outcomes study used in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology. The researchers assumed that there was no quality of life benefit for patients using watchful waiting compared to rituximab treatment, as it is potentially beneficial to treat the disease than wait for symptoms to arise.
The data show that rituximab induction alone is the most cost-effective approach in treating asymptomatic follicular lymphoma. While treatment outcome was improved when induction of rituximab was paired with rituximab maintenance, the value of the treatment was worth less than the cost. Watchful waiting was deemed the least cost-effective approach in treating advanced follicular lymphoma.
Some study limitations that the authors noted include the uncertainty around treatment in subsequent therapy lines, the unpublished quality of the life study on which researchers formed their model, and the unmeasured cost of possible reduced immunoglobulin levels in a patient when treated with rituximab.
“The results of the base case analysis suggest that rituximab induction alone is the most cost-effective strategy to adopt in patients with asymptomatic follicular lymphoma,” the authors concluded. “This result was shown to be robust in [1]-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.”
Reference
Prettyjohns M, Hoskin P, McNamara C, et al. The cost‐effectiveness of immediate treatment or watch and wait with deferred chemotherapy for advanced asymptomatic follicular lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2018;180(1):52-59. doi: 10.1111/bjh.14990.
Cencora Analysis Shows Differences in Payer Coverage Between G-CSF Biosimilars
May 2nd 2024Data from a Cencora study showed some misalignment in payer coverage of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) biosimilars, highlighting that while filgrastim biosimilars are often favored over the originator, reference pegfilgrastim still dominates over its biosimilars.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
Eye on Pharma: EU Ustekinumab Approval; New Golimumab Data; Evernorth Adds Humira Biosimilar
April 29th 2024The European Union gained a new ustekinumab biosimilar; Alvotech released positive results from a clinical trial evaluating a golimumab biosimilar and the reference products (Simponi and Simponi Aria), and Evernorth announced that it is set to cover an adalimumab biosimilar at zero cost to patients.
AON Saves Over $243 Million With High Biosimilar Adoption
April 22nd 2024Thanks to high biosimilar adoption rates within the community oncology setting, American Oncology Network (AON) saved upwards of $243 million between 2020 and 2023, according to a presentation at the Festival of Biologics USA conference in San Diego, California.
What Clinicians Need to Know About Using Biosimilars to Treat IBD
April 13th 2024A review article, intended to act as a guide for clinicians, summarizes the available infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars for treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) as well as others that are coming down the pipeline.