Cost-effectiveness of the regimen proposed by the International Consortium on Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia for the treatment of newly diagnosed patients with Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia

ABSTRACT Introduction: We performed cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of the modified International Consortium on Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia protocol in Mexico for the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia. Methods: We performed a three-state Markov analysis: stable disease (first line complete response [CR]), disease event (relapse, second line response and CR) and death. The modified IC-APL protocol is composed of three phases: induction, consolidation and maintenance. Cost and outcomes were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs); quality-adjusted life-years were used to calculate incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs). Results: The CR was achieved in 18 patients (90%), treated with the IC-APL protocol as the first-line option; one patient (5%) died in induction, another one never achieved CR (5%); of the 18 patients that achieved CR, 1 relapsed (5.5%). The median treatment cost of the IC-APL protocol was $21,523 USD. The average life-year in our study was 7.8 years, while the average quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was 6.1 years. When comparing the ICER between the IC-APL and the all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) plus arsenic trioxide (ATO) protocols, we found the different costs of $6497, $19,133 and $17,123 USD in Italy, the USA and Canada, respectively. In relation to the ICUR, we found the different costs to be $13,955 and $11,979 USD in the USA and Canada, respectively. Conclusion: Taking into account the similar response rates, lower cost and easy access to the modified IC-APL regimen, we consider it a cost-effective and cost-utility protocol, deeming it the treatment of choice for our population.

Warm autoimmune hemolytic anemia: experience from a single referral center in Mexico City

BACKGROUND: Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) is characterized by an autoimmune-mediated destruction of red blood cells. Warm AIHA (wAIHA) represents 60% of AIHA cases and is associated with the positive detection of IgG and C3d in the direct antiglobulin test (DAT). This study aimed to assess the clinical and laboratorial differences between primary and secondary wAIHA patients from a referral center in Mexico City. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with wAIHA in our institution from January 1992 to December 2015 were included and received corticosteroids as the first-line treatment. We analyzed the response to the first-line treatment, relapse-free survival, and time to splenectomy. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included. Secondary wAIHA represented 55.1% of the cases. At diagnosis, secondary wAIHA patients showed a DAT mixed pattern more frequently than primary wAIHA patients (36.7 vs. 17.5%, P<0.001). In the survival analysis, patients with secondary wAIHA had a lower time to response (18 vs. 37 days, P=0.05), median disease-free survival (28.51 vs. 50.95 weeks, P=0.018), and time to splenectomy (43.5 vs. 61 wks, P=0.029) than those with primary wAIHA. Due to economic constraints, rituximab was considered as the third-line treatment in only two patients. CONCLUSION: Secondary wAIHA may benefit from a longer low-dose steroid maintenance period mainly due to its shorter time to relapse and time to splenectomy than primary wAIHA.