IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Budget Impact of 12-Month Fixed Treatment Duration Venetoclax in Combination with Obinutuzumab in Previously Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Patients in the United States


  • Sang Kyu Cho

    (University of Southern California School of Pharmacy
    AbbVie Inc.)

  • Beenish S. Manzoor

    (AbbVie Inc.)

  • Kavita R. Sail

    (AbbVie Inc.)

  • Hélène Parisé

    (Medicus Economics, LLC)

  • Arliene Ravelo


  • Sheila Shapouri


  • Tatyana Kapustyan

    (AbbVie Inc.)

  • Simon Sharmokh

    (AbbVie Inc.)

  • Suchin Virabhak

    (Medicus Economics, LLC)

  • Matthew S. Davids

    (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute)

  • Scott Johnson

    (Medicus Economics, LLC)


Objectives This study aimed to assess the total cost of care (TCC) and budget impact of introducing 12-month fixed duration venetoclax + obinutuzumab (VEN+G) as first-line treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) from the perspective of a US health plan with 1,000,000 (1M) members. Methods The 3-year model included the following comparators: fludarabine + cyclophosphamide + rituximab (FCR), bendamustine + rituximab (BR), obinutuzumab + chlorambucil (GClb), ibrutinib (Ibr), and Ibr+Rituximab/obinutuzumab [Ibr+R/Ibr+G]). TCC included US-specific costs associated with treatment (i.e., drug, administration, and wastage), adverse events, routine care, and monitoring. Dosing and safety data were drawn from clinical trials and US package inserts. Budget impact outcomes were presented on an absolute and per-member per-month (PMPM) basis. Sensitivity analyses explored uncertainty in influential parameters, including scenarios testing the duration of treat-to-progression agents. Results Over the 3-year time horizon, introducing VEN+G in a 1M-member health plan resulted in total cost savings of $1,550,663 (PMPM − $0.04), compared to a scenario without VEN+G. The fixed 12-month duration of VEN+G contributed to this cost saving by reducing cumulative treatment costs compared with Ibr-based regimens. By year 3, the cumulative difference in TCC of VEN+G compared with Ibr, Ibr+G, and Ibr+R amounted to − $300,942, − $367,001, and − $369,784, respectively. Extensive sensitivity analyses supported the base case findings. Conclusions Introducing VEN+G among first-line CLL treatments to a US health plan resulted in cost savings compared to a plan with chemoimmunotherapies and Ibr-based therapies only. Economic benefits of VEN+G, a novel agent with fixed treatment duration, coupled with proven clinical benefits should help inform formulary adoption decisions and treatment recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Sang Kyu Cho & Beenish S. Manzoor & Kavita R. Sail & Hélène Parisé & Arliene Ravelo & Sheila Shapouri & Tatyana Kapustyan & Simon Sharmokh & Suchin Virabhak & Matthew S. Davids & Scott Johnson, 2020. "Budget Impact of 12-Month Fixed Treatment Duration Venetoclax in Combination with Obinutuzumab in Previously Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Patients in the United States," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(9), pages 941-951, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:9:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00919-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00919-1

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL:
    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.


    Blog mentions

    As found by, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Rita Faria’s journal round-up for 14th September 2020
      by Rita Faria in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2020-09-14 11:00:07

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:9:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00919-1. 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: .

    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.