16 research outputs found

    Increasing the information provided by probabilistic sensitivity analysis:The relative density plot

    Get PDF
    Background Results of probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) are frequently visualized as a scatterplot, which is limited through overdrawing and a lack of insight in relative density. To overcome these limitations, we have developed the Relative Density plot (PSA-ReD). Methods The PSA-ReD combines a density plot and a contour plot to visualize and quantify PSA results. Relative density, depicted using a color gradient, is transformed to a cumulative probability. Contours are then plotted over regions with a specific cumulative probability. We use two real-world case studies to demonstrate the value of the PSA-ReD plot. Results The PSA-ReD method demonstrates proof-of-concept and feasibility. In the real-world case-studies, PSA-ReD provided additional visual information that could not be understood from the traditional scatterplot. High density areas were identified by color-coding and the contour plot allowed for quantification of PSA iterations within areas of the cost-effectiveness plane, diminishing overdrawing and putting infrequent iterations in perspective. Critically, the PSA-ReD plot informs modellers about non-linearities within their model. Conclusions The PSA-ReD plot is easy to implement, presents more of the information enclosed in PSA data, and prevents inappropriate interpretation of PSA results. It gives modelers additional insight in model functioning and the distribution of uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness estimate

    Targeted Therapies Compared to Dacarbazine for Treatment of BRAF V600E Metastatic Melanoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

    Get PDF
    . Purpose. Two BRAF V600E targeted therapies, dabrafenib and vemurafenib, have received US approval for treatment of metastatic melanoma in BRAF V600E patients, a mutation that affects ∼50% of patients. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of BRAF inhibitors and traditional chemotherapy for treatment of metastatic melanoma. Methods. A Markov model was developed using a societal perspective. Transition probabilities were derived from two Phase III registration trials comparing each BRAF inhibitor against dacarbazine. Costs were obtained from literature, national databases, and Medicare fee schedules. Utilities were obtained from published literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were run to test the impact of uncertainties. Results. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dabrafenib was 149,035/QALYcomparedtodacarbazine.Vemurafenibwasdominatedbydabrafenib.Probabilisticsensitivityanalysisshowedthat,atawillingness−to−pay(WTP)thresholdof≤149,035/QALY compared to dacarbazine. Vemurafenib was dominated by dabrafenib. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ≤100,000/QALY, dacarbazine was the optimal treatment in ∼85% of simulations. At a WTP threshold of ≥150,000/QALY,dabrafenibwastheoptimaltreatment.Conclusion.Comparedwithdacarbazine,dabrafenibandvemurafenibwerenotcost−effectiveatawillingness−to−paythresholdof150,000/QALY, dabrafenib was the optimal treatment. Conclusion. Compared with dacarbazine, dabrafenib and vemurafenib were not cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 100,000/QALY. Dabrafenib is more efficient compared to vemurafenib. With few treatment options, dabrafenib is an option for qualifying patients if the overall cost of dabrafenib is reduced to 30,000−30,000-31,000 or a WTP threshold of ≥$150,000/QALY is considered. More comparative data is needed

    Cost-effectiveness of treating advanced melanoma with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes based on an international randomized phase 3 clinical trial

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: In a multicenter, open-label randomized phase 3 clinical trial conducted in the Netherlands and Denmark, treatment with ex vivo-expanded tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL-NKI/CCIT) from autologous melanoma tumor compared with ipilimumab improved progression-free survival in patients with unresectable stage IIIC-IV melanoma after failure of first-line or second-line treatment. Based on this trial, we conducted a cost-utility analysis. METHODS: A Markov decision model was constructed to estimate expected costs (expressed in 2021€) and outcomes (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of TIL-NKI/CCIT versus ipilimumab in the Netherlands. The Danish setting was assessed in a scenario analysis. A modified societal perspective was applied over a lifetime horizon. TIL-NKI/CCIT production costs were estimated via activity-based costing. Through sensitivity analyses, uncertainties and their impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were assessed. RESULTS: Mean total undiscounted lifetime benefits were 4.47 life years (LYs) and 3.52 QALYs for TIL-NKI/CCIT and 3.33 LYs and 2.46 QALYs for ipilimumab. Total lifetime undiscounted costs in the Netherlands were €347,168 for TIL-NKI/CCIT (including €67,547 for production costs) compared with €433,634 for ipilimumab. Undiscounted lifetime cost in the Danish scenario were €337,309 and €436,135, respectively. This resulted in a dominant situation for TIL-NKI/CCIT compared with ipilimumab in both countries, meaning incremental QALYs were gained at lower costs. Survival probabilities, and utility in progressive disease affected the ICER most. CONCLUSION: Based on the data of a randomized phase 3 trial, treatment with TIL-NKI/CCIT in patients with unresectable stage IIIC-IV melanoma is cost-effective and cost-saving, both in the current Dutch and Danish setting. These findings led to inclusion of TIL-NKI/CCIT as insured care and treatment guidelines. Publicly funded development of the TIL-NKI/CCIT cell therapy shows realistic promise to further explore development of effective personalized treatment while warranting economic sustainability of healthcare systems

    Targeted Therapies Compared to Dacarbazine for Treatment of BRAFV600E Metastatic Melanoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

    No full text
    Purpose. Two BRAFV600E targeted therapies, dabrafenib and vemurafenib, have received US approval for treatment of metastatic melanoma in BRAFV600E patients, a mutation that affects ~50% of patients. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of BRAF inhibitors and traditional chemotherapy for treatment of metastatic melanoma. Methods. A Markov model was developed using a societal perspective. Transition probabilities were derived from two Phase III registration trials comparing each BRAF inhibitor against dacarbazine. Costs were obtained from literature, national databases, and Medicare fee schedules. Utilities were obtained from published literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were run to test the impact of uncertainties. Results. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dabrafenib was 149,035/QALYcomparedtodacarbazine.Vemurafenibwasdominatedbydabrafenib.Probabilisticsensitivityanalysisshowedthat,atawillingness−to−pay(WTP)thresholdof≤149,035/QALY compared to dacarbazine. Vemurafenib was dominated by dabrafenib. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ≤100,000/QALY, dacarbazine was the optimal treatment in ~85% of simulations. At a WTP threshold of ≥150,000/QALY,dabrafenibwastheoptimaltreatment.Conclusion.Comparedwithdacarbazine,dabrafenibandvemurafenibwerenotcost−effectiveatawillingness−to−paythresholdof150,000/QALY, dabrafenib was the optimal treatment. Conclusion. Compared with dacarbazine, dabrafenib and vemurafenib were not cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 100,000/QALY. Dabrafenib is more efficient compared to vemurafenib. With few treatment options, dabrafenib is an option for qualifying patients if the overall cost of dabrafenib is reduced to 30,000–30,000–31,000 or a WTP threshold of ≥$150,000/QALY is considered. More comparative data is needed

    Development and regulation of gene and cell-based therapies in Europe : a quantification and reflection

    No full text
    Gene and cell-based therapies (GCTs) are said to hold great promise as treatments for previously untreatable and high-burden diseases. Here, we provide insight into GCT development and regulation activities in Europe, quantify clinical and regulatory success, and compare these with other medicinal products in order to reflect on regulatory changes and challenges

    The Relative Impact of Urinary and Sexual Function vs Bother on Health Utility for Men With Prostate Cancer

    Get PDF
    Function and bother are related but distinct aspects of health-related quality of life. The objective of this study was to compare quantitatively the relative impacts of function and bother in urinary, sexual, and bowel outcomes on health utility as a reflection of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Our analysis included participants in the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor utility supplementary study, with a final cohort of 1617 men. Linear regression on the patients' function and bother summary scores (0-100) from the University of California, Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index was performed to predict bias-corrected health utilities. Urinary and sexual bother were associated with each health utility, and their coefficients were 3.7 and 20.8 times greater, respectively, than those of the corresponding function. To our knowledge, our study provides the first quantitative and direct comparison of the impacts of function vs bother on health utility

    Modeling Benefits, Costs, and Affordability of a Novel Gene Therapy in Hemophilia A

    No full text
    The objective was to undertake an early cost-effectiveness assessment of valoctocogene roxaparvovec (valrox; Roctavian) compared to factor (F)VIII prophylaxis or emicizumab (Hemlibra; Roche HQ, Bazel, Switzerland) in patients with severe Hemophilia A (HA) without FVIII-antibodies. We also aimed to incorporate and quantify novel measures of value such as treatment durability, maximum value-based price (MVBP) and break-even time (ie, time until benefits begin to offset upfront payment). We constructed a Markov model to model bleeds over time which were linked to costs and quality-of-life decrements. In the valrox arm, FVIII over time was estimated combining initial effect and treatment waning and then linked to bleeds. In FVIII and emicizumab arms, bleeds were based on trial evidence. Evidence and assumptions were validated using expert elicitation. Model robustness was tested via sensitivity analyses. A Dutch societal perspective was applied with a 10-year time horizon. Valrox in comparison to FVIII, and emicizumab showed small increases in quality-adjusted life years at lower costs, and were therefore dominant. Valrox' base case MVBP was estimated at €2.65 million/treatment compared to FVIII and €3.5 million/treatment versus emicizumab. Mean break-even time was 8.03 years compared to FVIII and 5.68 years to emicizumab. Early modeling of patients with HA in The Netherlands treated with valrox resulted in estimated improved health and lower cost compared to prophylactic FVIII and emicizumab. We also demonstrated feasibility of incorporation of treatment durability and novel outcomes such as value-based pricing scenarios and break-even time. Future work should aim to better characterize uncertainties and increase translation of early modeling to direct research efforts
    corecore