ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia2023
Cost-effectiveness analysis of different combination therapies for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in India.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chronic lymphocytic leukemia management in India: balancing evidence, access, and affordability in clinical practice.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- A prospective, multi-center, phase IV clinical study to assess the safety and clinical outcome of acalabrutinib in Indian adult patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma or relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Over the years, there has been introduction of newer drugs, like bendamustine and ibrutinib, for the management of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). Though these drugs lead to better survival, they are also associated with higher cost. The existing evidence on cost effectiveness of these drugs is from high-income countries, which has limited generalisability for low-income and middle-income counties. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to assess the cost-effectiveness of three therapeutic regimens, chlorambucil plus prednisolone (CP), bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) and ibrutinib for CLL treatment in India. Methods: A Markov model was developed for estimating lifetime costs and consequences in a hypothetical cohort of 1000 CLL patients following treatment with different therapeutic regimens. The analysis was performed based on a limited societal perspective, 3% discount rate and lifetime horizon. The clinical effectiveness of each regime in the form of progression-free survival and occurrence of adverse events were assessed from various randomised controlled trials. A structured comprehensive review of literature was undertaken for the identification of relevant trials. The data on utility values and out of pocket expenditure was obtained from primary data collected from 242 CLL patients across six large cancer hospitals in India. Findings: As compared to the most affordable regimen comprising of CP as first-line followed by BR as second-line therapy, none of the other therapeutic regimens were cost-effective at one time per capita gross-domestic product of India. However, if the current price of either combination of BR and ibrutinib or even ibrutinib alone could be reduced by more than 80%, regimen comprising of BR as first-line therapy followed by second-line ibrutinib would become cost-effective. Interpretation: At the current market prices, regimen comprising of CP as first-line followed by BR as second-line therapy is the most cost-effective strategy for CLL treatment in India. Funding: Department of Health Research, Government of India.
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.