Belantamab mafodotin for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in heavily pretreated patients: a US cost-effectiveness analysis

dc.contributor.authorNikolaou, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorAmbavane, Apoorva
dc.contributor.authorShah, Anshul
dc.contributor.authorMa, Wenkang
dc.contributor.authorTosh, Jon
dc.contributor.authorKapetanakis, Venediktos
dc.contributor.authorWillson, Jenny
dc.contributor.authorWang, Feng
dc.contributor.authorHogea, Cosmina
dc.contributor.authorGorsh, Boris
dc.contributor.authorGutierrez, Ben
dc.contributor.authorSapra, Sandhya
dc.contributor.authorSuvannasankha, Attaya
dc.contributor.authorSamyshkin, Yevgeniy
dc.contributor.departmentMedicine, School of Medicine
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-05T11:22:01Z
dc.date.available2024-04-05T11:22:01Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractBackground: Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) require several lines of therapy, with typically shorter remission duration with each additional line. Research design and methods: The cost-effectiveness of belantamab mafodotin (belamaf; DREAMM-2; NCT03525678) was compared with selinexor plus dexamethasone (SEL+DEX; STORM Part 2; NCT02336815) among patients with RRMM who have received at least four prior therapies. The base case used a US commercial payer's perspective over a 10-year time horizon. Efficacy data were based on parametric survival analysis of DREAMM-2 and matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison between DREAMM-2 and STORM Part 2, which assessed relative treatment effects between belamaf and SEL+DEX. Cost inputs included drug treatment, concomitant medications, adverse event management, subsequent treatments, and disease management. Results: Belamaf decreased total treatment costs per patient by $14,267 and increased patient life years by 0.74 and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) by 0.49 versus SEL+DEX. Patients receiving belamaf accrued 0.12 fewer progression-free life years versus patients on SEL+DEX. Conclusions: From a US commercial payer's perspective, belamaf had lower costs, and increased QALYs and life-year gain, compared with SEL+DEX. Belamaf is therefore likely to be a cost-effective treatment option for patients with RRMM who have received four or more prior lines of therapy.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.identifier.citationNikolaou A, Ambavane A, Shah A, et al. Belantamab mafodotin for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in heavily pretreated patients: a US cost-effectiveness analysis. Expert Rev Hematol. 2021;14(12):1137-1145. doi:10.1080/17474086.2021.1970522
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/39807
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis
dc.relation.isversionof10.1080/17474086.2021.1970522
dc.relation.journalExpert Review of Hematology
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.sourcePublisher
dc.subjectCost-effectiveness
dc.subjectHRQoL
dc.subjectRRMM
dc.subjectEfficacy
dc.subjectModeling
dc.subjectSafety
dc.titleBelantamab mafodotin for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in heavily pretreated patients: a US cost-effectiveness analysis
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Nikolaou2021Belantamab-CCBYNCND.pdf
Size:
742.57 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: