Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31885053›Full record

ArticleHealth economics review2019

The cost-effectiveness of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase for first-line treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a UK-based cost-utility analysis.

Xingdi Hu, Kingsley P Wildman, Subham Basu, Peggy L Lin, Clare Rowntree, Vaskar Saha

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics review, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Xingdi HuGHEOR Analytics, Shire, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Kingsley P WildmanMedical Affairs for Oncology, UK & Ireland, Servier Laboratories Ltd, Stoke Poges, UK.
Subham BasuMedical Affairs Oncology, UK & Republic of Ireland, Shire Pharmaceuticals Ltd, London, UK.
Peggy L LinGHEOR Analytics, Shire, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Clare RowntreeHaematology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Vaskar SahaDivision of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, The Oglesby Cancer Research Building, 555 Wilmslow Road, Manchester, M20 4GJ, UK. v.saha@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2916-9649
Systems Analytics (United States) · USServier (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity Hospital of Wales · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

Baxalta Study sponsorServier Funded medical writing support and publication chargesShire (CH) Funded medical writing support
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundL-asparaginase is a key component of treatment for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) in the UK. Commonly used forms of asparaginase are native E. coli-derived asparaginase (native asparaginase) and pegaspargase in first-line combination therapy, and native Erwinia chrysanthemi-derived asparaginase (Erwinia asparaginase) as second-line treatment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase in first-line combination therapy for patients with newly diagnosed ALL. A combined decision tree and health-state transition Markov cost-effectiveness model was developed to assess the relative costs and health outcomes of pegaspargase versus native asparaginase in the UK setting.

resultsIn base case analyses, first-line pegaspargase (followed by Erwinia asparaginase in cases of hypersensitivity) dominated first-line native asparaginase followed by Erwinia asparaginase; i.e. resulted in lower costs and more quality-adjusted life year gain. The favourable hypersensitivity rates and administration profile of pegaspargase led to lifetime cost savings of £4741 versus native asparaginase. Pegaspargase remained cost-effective versus all treatment strategies in all scenario analyses, including use of the 2500 IU/m

conclusionsPegaspargase, as part of multi-drug chemotherapy, is a cost-effective option for the treatment of newly diagnosed ALL. Based on this study, The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Technology Appraisal Committee concluded that it could recommend pegaspargase as a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources in England & Wales for treating ALL in children, young people and adults with untreated, newly diagnosed disease.

trial registrationUKALL 2011, EudraCT number 2010-020924-22; UKALL 2003, EudraCT number 2007-004013-34; UKALL14, EudraCT number 2009-012717-22.

Indexed as

Acute lymphoblastic leukaemiaAsparaginaseCost-effectivenessFirst line treatment

Identifiers

PMID31885053
PMCPMC6935472
OpenAlexW2997619749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.