ArticlePharmacoEconomics2024
Cost Effectiveness of Zanubrutinib Versus Ibrutinib in Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost Effectiveness of First-Line Therapies for Treatment-Naïve Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia in South Africa.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Article
- Economic Evaluation of Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia in South Africa.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in the first-line treatment for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) in China.Health economics review · 2026Article
- Chronic lymphocytic leukemia: criteria for first-line therapeutic choice-an opinion paper.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile the efficacy and safety of zanubrutinib have been established in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, the evidence on cost effectiveness is still lacking.
objectiveWe aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia from the commercial payer perspective in the USA.
methodsA partitioned survival model was developed based on survival curves from the phase III ALPINE trial. We reconstructed patient-level data for each curve and conducted a parametric estimation to incorporate long-term clinical outcomes and treatment costs into the model. Medical costs and utilities were obtained from public data and previous cost-effectiveness studies. A discount rate of 3.0% per annum was applied and costs were adjusted to 2023 US dollars. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated by dividing the incremental costs of zanubrutinib over ibrutinib by the incremental life-years or quality-adjusted life-years. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the results.
resultsOver a 10-year analysis period, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib was $91,260 per life-year gained and $120,634 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, making it cost effective within a threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was most sensitive to drug acquisition costs and progression-free survival distributions, and the probability of zanubrutinib being cost effective was approximately 52.8%, with a 30.0% likelihood of dominance.
conclusionsZanubrutinib is likely to be cost effective versus ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the USA, but the high threshold should be noted. Our findings may provide a basis for pricing strategy and reimbursement decisions for zanubrutinib.
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.