IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v22y2024i1d10.1007_s40258-023-00826-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Effectiveness of Molecular Diagnostic Testing Algorithms for the Treatment Selection of Frontline Ibrutinib for Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Vu

    (The University of Melbourne
    The University of Melbourne)

  • Koen Degeling

    (The University of Melbourne
    The University of Melbourne)

  • Ella R. Thompson

    (Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
    The University of Melbourne)

  • Piers Blombery

    (Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
    The University of Melbourne
    Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre/Royal Melbourne Hospital)

  • David Westerman

    (Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
    The University of Melbourne
    Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre/Royal Melbourne Hospital)

  • Maarten J. IJzerman

    (The University of Melbourne
    The University of Melbourne
    Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management)

Abstract

Background Clinical indications for ibrutinib reimbursement in Australia should consider the inclusion of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) harboring prognostically unfavorable TP53/IGHV genomic aberrations. This study assessed the cost effectiveness of five first-line treatment strategies in CLL for young (aged ≤ 65 years), fit patients without significant comorbidities: (1) no testing (fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab [FCR] for all), (2) test for del(17p) only, (3) test for TP53 gene mutation status, (4) test for TP53 and IGHV gene mutation status and (5) no testing (ibrutinib for all). Method A decision analytic model (decision tree and partitioned survival model) was developed from the Australian healthcare system perspective with a lifetime horizon. Comparative treatment effects were estimated from indirect treatment comparisons and survival analysis using several studies. Costs, utility and adverse events were derived from public literature sources. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses explored the impact of modeling uncertainties on outcomes. Results Strategy 1 was associated with 5.69 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost 458,836 Australian dollars (AUD). All other strategies had greater effectiveness but were more expensive than Strategy 1. At the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 100,000 AUD per QALY gained, Strategy 1 was most cost effective with an estimated probability of 68.8%. Strategy 4 was cost effective between thresholds 155,000–432,300 AUD per QALY gained, and Strategy 5 >432,300 AUD per QALY gained. Conclusion Population targeting using mutation testing for TP53 and IGHV when performed with del(17p) testing specifically in the context of frontline ibrutinib choice does not make a cost-ineffective treatment into a cost-effective treatment.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Vu & Koen Degeling & Ella R. Thompson & Piers Blombery & David Westerman & Maarten J. IJzerman, 2024. "Cost Effectiveness of Molecular Diagnostic Testing Algorithms for the Treatment Selection of Frontline Ibrutinib for Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia in Australia," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 107-122, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-023-00826-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-023-00826-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-023-00826-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-023-00826-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-023-00826-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.