ArticleThe oncologist2013
The cost-effectiveness of initial treatment of multiple myeloma in the U.S. with bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone versus thalidomide plus melphalan and prednisone or lenalidomide plus melphalan and prednisone with continuous lenalidomide maintenance treatment.
Article in The oncologist, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost Effectiveness of Transplant, Conventional Chemotherapy, and Novel Agents in Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- Response and progression-free survival according to planned treatment duration in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma treated with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in the phase III ASPIRE study.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2018Trial
- Dysregulation of Non-Coding RNAs: Roles of miRNAs and lncRNAs in the Pathogenesis of Multiple Myeloma.Non-coding RNA · 2023Review
- Multiple Myeloma: Challenges Encountered and Future Options for Better Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- The Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Transplant-Ineligible Myeloma Patients with Bortezomib plus Thalidomide plus Dexamethasone (VTD) or Bortezomib plus Melphalan plus Prednisolone (VMP) Treatment in Southern Taiwan.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Long-Term Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Multiple Myeloma Treatment Strategies for Elderly Transplant-Ineligible Patients in Serbia.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2020Article
- Cancer drug development: The missing links.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2019Review
- Temporal Trends in Survival and Healthcare Costs in Patients with Multiple Myeloma in the United States.American health & drug benefits · 2018Article
- Article
- Ninlaro (Ixazomib): First Oral Proteasome Inhibitor Approved for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.American health & drug benefits · 2016Article
- Pomalyst (Pomalidomide) Received a New Indication for Patients with Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.American health & drug benefits · 2016Article
- Kyprolis (Carfilzomib) Received New Indications as Combination Therapy for Use in Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.American health & drug benefits · 2016Article
- Empliciti (Elotuzumab): First SLAMF7 Antibody Therapy Approved for the Treatment of Patients with Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma.American health & drug benefits · 2016Article
- Darzalex (Daratumumab): First Anti-CD38 Monoclonal Antibody Approved for Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.American health & drug benefits · 2016Article
- Revlimid (Lenalidomide) Now FDA Approved as First-Line Therapy for Patients with Multiple Myeloma.American health & drug benefits · 2016Article
- Management of Multiple Myeloma and Usage of Bortezomib: Perspective from India and Ukraine.Frontiers in oncology · 2016Article
- Multiple myeloma in the marrow: pathogenesis and treatments.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2016Review
- Cost-effectiveness of bortezomib for multiple myeloma: a systematic review.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2016Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Elderly Patients with Multiple Myeloma using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Database.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The outlook for transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma patients has improved enormously over recent years with the incorporation of new agents into standard regimens. Novel regimens combine melphalan and prednisone (MP) with bortezomib (VMP), with thalidomide (MPT), and with lenalidomide with (MPR-R) and without (MPR) lenalidomide maintenance. The efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of these regimens have not yet been compared; therefore, we conducted a pharmacoeconomic analysis using data from randomized controlled trials versus MP. Using a Markov model developed from a U.S. payer's perspective, we compared VMP with MPT and MPR-R over a lifetime horizon. MPT and MPR-R were chosen because, like VMP, they are superior to MP in response and outcomes. Data from the Velcade as Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple Myeloma (VISTA; VMP), Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome (IFM) 99-06 (MPT), and MM-015 (MPR-R) trials were used. The IFM 99-06 study was selected because of the superior activity in this study compared with other MPT studies. Using patient-level (VMP) and published (MPT, MPR-R) data, we estimated the health-state transition and adverse event probabilities for each regimen, related costs, and state-specific utility estimates. Costs (in 2010 U.S. dollars) and health outcomes were discounted at 3%. Discounted lifetime direct medical costs were lowest with VMP at $119,102. MPT cost $142,452 whereas MPR-R cost $248,358. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio calculations projected that VMP would confer cost savings and better health outcomes relative to MPT and MPR-R. We conclude that VMP is highly likely to be cost-effective compared with MP, MPT, and MPR-R.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.