ArticleImmunotherapy2025
Cost-utility analysis of blinatumomab in pediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in Iran.
Article in Immunotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02393859 (Phase 3 Trial to Investigate the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Blinatumomab as Consolidation Therapy Versus Conventional Consolidation Chemotherapy in Pediatric Subjects With HR First Relapse B-precursor ALL), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Phase 3 Trial to Investigate the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Blinatumomab as Consolidation Therapy Versus Conventional Consolidation Chemotherapy in Pediatric Subjects With HR First Relapse B-precursor ALL
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Blinatumomab for treatment of children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in Hong Kong: A cost-effectiveness analysis.British journal of haematology · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility analyses of blinatumomab in children with relapsed/refractory B-cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (B-ALL) compared to Consolidation Chemotherapy in Iran.
methodBased on the results of the phase III randomized 20120215 trial (NCT02393859) the cost-utility analysis, was evaluated over a lifetime using the Parietal Survival model with three health states. The model considered both direct and indirect costs from a societal perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated by determining the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Costs and QALYs were discounted annually at 5.8% and 5%, respectively. Deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) and Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to assess the model's robustness.
resultsThe study estimated that blinatumomab is a cost-effective treatment option, with a probability of 57.2%. Blinatumomab was associated with a higher cost ($42,481 versus $21,355) and higher QALYs gained (13.14 versus 8.06) compared to Consolidation Chemotherapy with an ICER of USD 4,160, which is below the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 4,210 USD in Iran.
conclusionsBlinatumomab is a cost-effective treatment strategy for pediatric patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia B-ALL from an Iranian societal perspective.
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.