Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37439892›Full record

ArticleAnnals of hematology2023

Generic ibrutinib a potential cost-effective strategy for the first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

Naveen C Hegde, Ankit Kumar, Shaweta Kaundal, Lekha Saha, Pankaj Malhotra, Shankar Prinja, Deepesh Lad, Amol N Patil

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of hematology, 2023. 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
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Naveen C HegdeDepartment of Pharmacology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Ankit KumarDepartment of Pharmacology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Shaweta KaundalDepartment of Clinical Hematology & Medical Oncology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Lekha SahaDepartment of Pharmacology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Pankaj MalhotraDepartment of Clinical Hematology & Medical Oncology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Shankar PrinjaSchool of Public Health, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Deepesh LadDepartment of Clinical Hematology & Medical Oncology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India. deepesh.kem@gmail.com.
Amol N PatilDepartment of Pharmacology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India. patil.amol@pgimer.edu.in.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8552-2796
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Though the chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) management options in India are still limited compared to the novel drug options in resource-rich settings, the availability of less costly generics and the government health insurance scheme has enabled many patients to access the newer drugs in India. The current study compared the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of existing initial management options for the progression-free survival (PFS) time horizon from the patient's perspective. A two-health-state, PFS and progressive disease, Markov model was assumed for three regimens (generics): ibrutinib monotherapy, bendamustine-rituximab (B-R), and rituximab-chlorambucil (RClb) used as the frontline treatment of CLL patients in India. All costs, utilization of services, and consequences data during the PFS period were collected from interviewing patients during follow-up visits. The transition probability (TP) and average PFS information were obtained from landmark published studies. EQ-5D-5L questionnaires were utilized to assess the quality of life (QoL). Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were measured during the PFS period. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were studied. Upon analysis, the entire monetary expense during the PFS time was ₹1581964 with ibrutinib, ₹171434 with B-R, and ₹91997 with RClb treatment arm. Pooled PFS and QALY gain was 10.33 and 8.28 years for ibrutinib, 4.08 and 3.53 years for the B-R regimen, and 1.33 and 1.23 years in RClb arms, respectively. Ibrutinib's ICER and ICUR were ₹214587.32 per PFS year gain and ₹282384.86 per QALY gain when assessed against the B-R regimen. Ibrutinib also performed better in ICER and ICUR against the RClb arm with ₹157014.29 per PFS year gain and ₹200413.6 per QALY gain. In conclusion, generic ibrutinib is a cost-effective initial line of management compared to other commonly used treatment regimes in resource-limited settings.

Indexed as

AdenineCost-Benefit AnalysisDrugs, GenericLeukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-CellPiperidinesAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBendamustine HydrochlorideChlorambucilFemaleHumansIndiaMaleMarkov ChainsMiddle AgedPyrazolesPyrimidinesAdenineBendamustine HydrochlorideChlorambucilDrugs, GenericibrutinibPiperidinesPyrazolesPyrimidinesRituximabBendamustineChlorambucilChronic lymphocytic leukaemiaGenericIbrutinibIncremental cost-effectiveness ratioIncremental cost-utility ratioInnovatorLow-middle-income countryQuality-adjusted life yearRituximabWillingness to pay

Identifiers

PMID37439892
OpenAlexW4384120386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.