Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2009
Cost-effectiveness study comparing imatinib with interferon-alpha for patients with newly diagnosed chronic-phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) from the Chinese public health-care system perspective (CPHSP).
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chen Zi, Wang Chun, Xu Xiaoping, Feng Weiwei
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Imatinib, a breakthrough oral molecular-targeted therapy, has demonstrated durable responses and significant survival advantage compared with interferon-based treatment. This study compares imatinib with interferon in newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML-CP) patients from the Chinese public health-care system perspective (CPHSP).
METHODS: One-year cost responder and lifetime cost-utility analyses were conducted, respectively. Complete cytogenetic response was used to define a responder. Direct medical costs were included. Response rates as well as survival estimates were obtained from published literature.
RESULTS: The cost per responder for interferon was close to 20 times higher than that for imatinib. The cost per additional responder was RMB36,545. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) comparing imatinib with interferon was RMB73,674 (95% confidence interval RMB67,712-RMB79,637) per quality-adjusted life-year.
CONCLUSION: In newly diagnosed CML-CP, the cost per responder for patients treated with imatinib is much lower than that for patients treated with interferon. In the cost-utility analysis, the ICER is below the cost-effectiveness threshold recommended by the World Health Organization for developing countries. Therefore, imatinib is more cost-effective than interferon from the CPHSP.
METHODS: One-year cost responder and lifetime cost-utility analyses were conducted, respectively. Complete cytogenetic response was used to define a responder. Direct medical costs were included. Response rates as well as survival estimates were obtained from published literature.
RESULTS: The cost per responder for interferon was close to 20 times higher than that for imatinib. The cost per additional responder was RMB36,545. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) comparing imatinib with interferon was RMB73,674 (95% confidence interval RMB67,712-RMB79,637) per quality-adjusted life-year.
CONCLUSION: In newly diagnosed CML-CP, the cost per responder for patients treated with imatinib is much lower than that for patients treated with interferon. In the cost-utility analysis, the ICER is below the cost-effectiveness threshold recommended by the World Health Organization for developing countries. Therefore, imatinib is more cost-effective than interferon from the CPHSP.