← 返回

儿童与年轻成人急性淋巴细胞白血病中 tisagenlecleucel 对比 blinatumomab 的成本效果分析:评估基于结局的支付安排影响的分区生存模型

英文原题:Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Tisagenlecleucel Versus Blinatumomab in Children and Young Adults with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Partitioned Survival Model to Assess the Impact of an Outcome-Based Payment Arrangement.

查看英文原题

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Tisagenlecleucel Versus Blinatumomab in Children and Young Adults with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Partitioned Survival Model to Assess the Impact of an Outcome-Based Payment Arrangement.

PubMed 2022/10/21(内容时间) Pharmacoeconomics Q1 · IF 4.7(JCR 2025)

分数与星级只用于站内排序 —— 不代表疗效、安全性或个人适用性。

研究概要

OBAs 对降低成本效果不确定性影响有限。OBAs 的价值应与其管理所需的额外资源相权衡,更重要的是与政府的总体成本相权衡。

研究思路结论见上方概要

本研究评估了一种基于结果的支付安排(OBA)的影响,该安排将完全缓解(CR)与生存挂钩,作为维持 CAR-T 疗法在年轻急性淋巴细胞白血病(ALL)患者中成本效益的一种手段。

采用分区生存模型(PSM)从澳大利亚医疗系统视角对tisagenlecleucel与blinatumomab治疗ALL的成本效果进行建模。决策树通过根据应答将患者导入一系列PSM来模拟不同的OBA。结局数据来源于个体患者数据,成本则遵循澳大利亚治疗实践。将成本与质量调整生命年(QALYs)合并计算单一增量成本效果比(ICER),以美元(2022年)报告,成本和结局的贴现率为5%。

在基础案例中,增量成本和收益分别为379,595美元和4.27 QALYs,得出的ICER为88,979美元。ICER对贴现率(57,660-75,081美元)、治愈点(62,718-116,206美元)和外推方法(76,018-94,049美元)最为敏感。当响应率变化时,OBAs对ICER有适度影响。仅对响应者支付是维持ICER最有效的安排(88,249-89,434美元),尽管这一选项与最大的财务不确定性相关。与一次性预付(77,599-107,273美元)相比,分阶段支付安排(输注时支付,随后根据响应支付)减少了ICER的变异性(82,650-99,154美元)。

展开英文摘要原文

This research assesses the impact of an outcome-based payment arrangement (OBA) linking complete remission (CR) to survival as a means of maintaining cost-effectiveness for a chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy in young patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

A partitioned survival model (PSM) was used to model the cost-effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel versus blinatumomab in ALL from the Australian healthcare system perspective. A decision tree modeled different OBAs by funneling patients into a series of PSMs based on response. Outcomes were informed by individual patient data, while costs followed Australian treatment practices. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were combined to calculate a single incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), reported in US dollars (2022) at a discount rate of 5% on costs and outcomes.

For the base case, incremental costs and benefit were $379,595 and 4.27 QALYs, giving an ICER of $88,979. The ICER was most sensitive to discount rate ($57,660-$75,081), "cure point" ($62,718-$116,206) and extrapolation method ($76,018-$94,049). OBAs had a modest effect on the ICER when response rates varied. A responder-only payment was the most effective arrangement for maintaining the ICER ($88,249-$89,434), although this option was associated with the greatest financial uncertainty. A split payment arrangement (payment on infusion followed by payment on response) reduced variability in the ICER ($82,650-$99,154) compared with a single, upfront payment ($77,599-$107,273).

OBAs had a modest impact on reducing cost-effectiveness uncertainty. The value of OBAs should be weighed against the additional resources needed to administer such arrangements, and importantly overall cost to government.

论文信息

作者
Gye A、Goodall S、De Abreu Lourenco R
单位
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, Australia. amy.gye@student.uts.edu.au.Australia
文献类型
非美国政府资助研究
期刊
PharmacoEconomics2023 Feb
原文标识
PubMed 36266557 · DOI 10.1007/s40273-022-01188-w