Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24729719›Full record

ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2014

Economic implications of using bendamustine, alemtuzumab, or chlorambucil as a first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the US: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Thitima Kongnakorn, James A Sterchele, Christopher G Salvador, Denis Getsios, Mkaya Mwamburi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Systematic Literature Review of Economic Evaluations of Treatment Alternatives in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thitima KongnakornEvidera, Bangkok, Thailand.
James A Stercheleformerly of Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc, Frazer, PA.
Christopher G SalvadorOncology Market Research, Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc, Frazer, PA.
Denis GetsiosEvidera, Lexington, MA.
Mkaya MwamburiTufts University School of Medicine, Public Health and Community Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Ithaka Harbors · USTufts University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using bendamustine versus alemtuzumab or bendamustine versus chlorambucil as a first-line therapy in patients with Binet stage B or C chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the US.

methodsA discrete event simulation of the disease course of CLL was developed to evaluate the economic implications of single-agent treatment with bendamustine, alemtuzumab, or chlorambucil, which are indicated for a treatment-naïve patient population with Binet stage B or C CLL. Data from clinical trials were used to create a simulated patient population, risk equations for progression-free survival and survival post disease progression, response rates, and rates of adverse events. Costs from a US health care payer perspective in 2012 US dollars, survival (life years), and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated over a patient's lifetime; all were discounted at 3% per year.

resultsCompared with alemtuzumab, bendamustine was considered to be a dominant treatment providing greater benefit (6.10 versus 5.37 life years and 4.02 versus 3.45 QALYs) at lower cost ($78,776 versus $121,441). Compared with chlorambucil, bendamustine was associated with higher costs ($78,776 versus $42,337) but with improved health outcomes (6.10 versus 5.21 life years and 4.02 versus 3.30 QALYs), resulting in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $40,971 per life year gained and $50,619 per QALY gained.

conclusionBendamustine is expected to provide cost savings and greater health benefit than alemtuzumab in treatment-naïve patients with CLL. Furthermore, it can be considered as a cost-effective treatment providing health benefits at an acceptable cost versus chlorambucil in the US.

Indexed as

alemtuzumabbendamustinechlorambucilchronic lymphocytic leukemiacost-effectivenessdiscrete event simulation model

Identifiers

PMID24729719
PMCPMC3979694
OpenAlexW2059385966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.