ArticleBlood advances2023
Cost-effectiveness of targeted treatment vs chemoimmunotherapy in treatment-naive unfit CLL without TP53 aberrations.
Article in Blood advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Cost Effectiveness of Genomic Medicine in Cancer Control: A Systematic Literature Review.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- A Markov analysis of azacitidine and venetoclax vs induction chemotherapy for medically fit patients with AML.Blood advances · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Venetoclax-Based Treatment in Treatment-Naïve Fit Patients With CLL Without TP53 Aberrations.European journal of haematology · 2026Article
- Cost Effectiveness of First-Line Therapies for Treatment-Naïve Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia in South Africa.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Article
- Real-world comparison of health care costs of venetoclax-obinutuzumab vs Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor use among US Medicare beneficiaries with chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the frontline setting.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2024Article
- First-Line Treatment of Older Patients with CLL: A New Approach in the Chemo-Free Era.Cancers · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several targeted treatments, such as venetoclax + obinutuzumab (VenO) and ibrutinib, have been developed to treat patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and have been shown to improve progression-free survival compared with chlorambucil + obinutuzumab (ClbO). However, novel targeted agents are associated with a significant cost investment. The objective of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of VenO compared with ClbO and ibrutinib in treatment-naive CLL without del17p/TP53 mutation in Denmark. We used a decision-analytic modeling approach to simulate hypothetical cohorts of patients with CLL from the initiation of first-line treatment to death, including the full treatment pathway and second-line therapy. VenO, ClbO, or ibrutinib was included as first-line therapy followed by either Ven + rituximab or ibrutinib. Model outcomes were expected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), life years (LYs), and cost per patient, which were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness to pay from €23 600 to €35 600 per QALY. Compared with ClbO, VenO was associated with a QALY gain of 1.30 (1.42 LYs) over a lifetime. The incremental cost was €12 360, resulting in an ICER of €9491 per QALY gained, indicating that VenO is cost-effective. Compared with VenO, ibrutinib was associated with a QALY gain of 0.82 (1.74 LYs) but at a substantially increased incremental cost of €247 488 over a lifetime horizon. The ICER was €302 156 per QALY, indicating that ibrutinib in first-line treatment would not be considered cost-effective in Danish health care, compared with VenO. Future analyses in fit patients with CLL are needed to determine the cost-effectiveness of VenO.
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.