ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2020
Economic Evaluation of Azacitidine in Elderly Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia with High Blast Counts.
Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of Enasidenib versus conventional care for older patients withLeukemia & lymphoma · 2025Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of azacitidine and ivosidenib in newly diagnosed older, intensive chemotherapy-ineligible patients withLeukemia & lymphoma · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness of azacitidine and venetoclax in unfit patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia.Blood advances · 2021Article
- JAK2 V617F as a Marker for Long-Term Disease Progression and Mortality in Polycythemia Vera and its Role in Economic Modeling.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAzacitidine is an hypomethylating agent widely adopted for the treatment of acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) in patients who are ineligible for curative-intent chemotherapy. Patients with low bone marrow blast counts (< 30%) experience improved survival with azacitidine, but the benefits are significantly lower in patients with > 30% blasts in the bone marrow. As such, there is uncertainty around the economic benefit of azacitidine in patients with higher blast counts.
objectiveWe present a cost-utility analysis of azacitidine in patients with AML with > 30% blasts to determine the economic value of azacitidine in this patient population from the perspective of a third-party payer.
methodsA Markov model was developed with a time horizon of 25 months divided into 22 cycles of 35 days each. The cost utility of azacitidine was compared with that of conventional care regimens (which include best supportive care, low-dose cytarabine and induction chemotherapy). A Canadian public healthcare system perspective was selected.
resultsIn the base case, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]) for azacitidine compared with conventional care regimens was $Can160,438, year 2018 values. The estimated ICER was insensitive to a longer time horizon but sensitive to the cost of azacitidine and to assumptions relating to survival in both treatment regimens, although the ICER always remained greater than Can$80,000 in all scenarios.
conclusionAzacitidine is unlikely to be cost effective given that the estimated ICER exceeds the willingness to pay commonly used in the Canadian healthcare system.
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.