ArticleJournal of market access & health policy2023
Cost-utility and value of information analysis of tisagenlecleucel for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the Irish healthcare setting.
Article in Journal of market access & health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Economic Evaluations of CAR-T Therapies for Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Value of information analyses for advanced cell therapies: a systematic review.Health economics review · 2026Review
- Pharmacoeconomic Profiles of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products in Rare Diseases: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Economic evaluation of anti-CD19 CAR T-cell pathway for large B-cell lymphomas in the real-life setting: the experience of an Italian hub center in the first three years of activity.Annals of hematology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The evidence base of tisagenlecleucel is uncertain. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel. To conduct expected value of perfect information (EVPI) and partial EVPI (EVPPI) analyses. Study Design: A three-state partitioned survival model. A short-term decision tree partitioned patients in the tisagenlecleucel arm according to infusion status. Survival was extrapolated to 5 years; general population mortality with a standardised mortality ratio was then applied. EVPI and EVPPI were scaled up to population according to the incidence of the decision. Setting: Irish healthcare payer. Participants: Patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL). Interventions: Tisagenlecleucel versus Salvage Chemotherapy (with or without haematopoietic stem cell transplant). Main Outcome Measure: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Population EVPI and EVPPI. Results: At list prices, the ICER was €119,509 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) (incremental costs €218,092; incremental QALYs 1.82). Probability of cost-effectiveness, at a €45,000 per QALY threshold, was 0%. Population EVPI was €0.00. Population EVPI, at the price of tisagenlecleucel that reduced the ICER to €45,000 per QALY, was €3,989,438. Here, survival analysis had the highest population EVPPI (€1,128,053). Conclusion: Tisagenlecleucel is not cost-effective, versus salvage chemotherapy (with or without haematopoietic stem cell transplant), for R/R DLBCL in Ireland. At list prices, further research to decrease decision uncertainty may not be of value.
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.