ArticleTherapeutic advances in hematology2024
Cost-effectiveness of acalabrutinib monotherapy or with obinutuzumab versus chemoimmunotherapy for untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia in China.
Article in Therapeutic advances in hematology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02475681 (A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label, 3 Arm Phase 3 Study of Obinutuzumab in Combination With Chlorambucil, Acalabrutinib), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label, 3 Arm Phase 3 Study of Obinutuzumab in Combination With Chlorambucil, Acalabrutinib (ACP-196) in Combination With Obinutuzumab, and Acalabrutinib Monotherapy in Subjects With Previously Untreated CLL
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acalabrutinib is a highly selective, latest generation Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The ELEVATE-TN trial (NCT02475681) found significant benefits achieved by the acalabrutinib regimen compared to the chemoimmunotherapy regimen chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in treatment-naïve CLL. The objective of this study was to explore the cost-effectiveness of acalabrutinib in the first-line treatment of CLL in the light of Chinese healthcare system. Methods: We constructed a 4-week partitioned survival model and a 20-year lifetime horizon to estimate the cost and utility associated with CLL treatment. The survival data, direct medical costs, and utilities came from the ELEVATE-TN trial, YAOZHI database, and published literatures. The outputs of the model including total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. One-way, probabilistic sensitivity, and scenario analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the model. Results: Over a 20-year lifetime horizon, treatment with acalabrutinib + obinutuzumab provided an additional 2.51 QALYs versus treatment with chlorambucil and obinutuzumab, while incurring incremental costs of $940,543 and an ICER of $374,449/QALY. Acalabrutinib had an incremental cost of $683,640 and provided an additional 2.24 QALYs, resulted an ICER of $305,562/QALY. One-way sensitivity analyses suggested that the model was most sensitive to utility of progression-free survival, progression disease, and the cost of acalabrutinib. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold, the probabilities of the acalabrutinib regimens were at an absolute disadvantage. The scenario analyses showed altering the lifetime horizon or price of acalabrutinib did not reverse results of our model. Conclusion: Acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab might not be a cost-effective option in recent China, when compared with chemoimmunotherapy for first-line patients with CLL at the commonly WTP threshold. It is therefore necessary to reduce the price of acalabrutinib.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.