Trial reportPharmacoEconomics2021
Budget Impact Analysis of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin for the Treatment of CD33-Positive Acute Myeloid Leukemia.
Trial report in PharmacoEconomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Budget Impact of Venetoclax for Newly Diagnosed Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Aged ≥ 75 Years or with Comorbidities Precluding Intensive Chemotherapy in the United States.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Monoclonal Antibodies as a Breakthrough in Personalised Leukaemia Therapy: What Pharmacists and Doctors Should Know.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) was approved in 2017 in the US for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed CD33-positive (CD33+) acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and adults and pediatric patients with CD33+ relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to estimate the budgetary impact of introducing GO to a 1-million-member US health plan over a 5-year period.
methodsWe developed models to estimate the impact of introducing GO in combination with conventional induction chemotherapy or as monotherapy for newly diagnosed AML, and as monotherapy for R/R AML. Models were built using data on drug costs and treatment-related outcomes obtained from published clinical trials and other publicly available sources. Results were reported on a per member/per year and per member/per month (PMPM) basis.
resultsBase-case results of the newly diagnosed model indicated that the addition of GO in the combination setting reduced the overall budget of a 1-million-member health plan. The estimated net cost (US$) savings ranged from $72,969 ($0.006 PMPM) in year 1 to $745,426 ($0.062 PMPM) in year 5. In the monotherapy setting, GO was associated with increased net costs ranging from $4118 (0.0003 PMPM) in year 1 to $31,885 ($0.003 PMPM) in year 5. Base-case results of the R/R AML model demonstrated increased net costs that ranged from $17,326 ($0.001 PMPM) in year 1 to $46,163 ($0.004 PMPM) in year 5. Scenario analyses in all settings indicated the budget impact was not overly sensitive to the selected input assumptions, with the exception of the scenario considering only the pharmacy budget impact in the combination setting.
conclusionsThe introduction of GO for newly diagnosed and R/R AML would have a minimal impact on the budget of a US health plan and could result in cost savings in the combination therapy setting for newly diagnosed AML.
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.