The cost of multiple myeloma and its complications: A single-center study from Oran, Algeria.

BACKGROUND: The expenses of multiple myeloma (MM) represent a real economic and societal burden for patients and health authorities. However, very little is known about the situation in Algeria. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the costs generated by the management of MM and its complications in Algerian patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational retrospective study conducted on patients diagnosed with MM, from January 1st, 2019 to April 31st, 2023, at the Establishment Hospitalier Universitaire November 1st, Oran. A bottom-up costing methodology was used to assess the phase-specific cost and the complication burden. RESULTS: In total, 249 qualified for the study. For autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) eligible patients, the mean per patient cost of treating myeloma was estimated at: induction regimen ($4072); ASCT ($2899); consolidation ($1538); and maintenance ($355.76). The mean drug cost for ASCT-ineligible patients was $1421. The use of generic bortezomib and generic melphalan has led to a reduction in expenses of $1,075,181 ($5,024 per patient; 55.35%) and $10,864 ($487 per patient; 15.07%), respectively. Another cost-saving adaptation was ASCT using non-cryopreserved (NC) stem cells. The cost of managing MM complications was $177,782 per year. CONCLUSION: A number of adjustments have been implemented to the management of MM over time to improve clinical efficacy and reduce costs in Algeria. However, this may have come with a startlingly high cost of complications.

Extrapolating Survival Data Using Historical Trial-Based a Priori Distributions.

OBJECTIVES: To show how clinical trial data can be extrapolated using historical trial data-based a priori distributions. METHODS: Extrapolations based on 30-month pivotal multiple myeloma trial data were compared with 75-month data from the same trial. The 30-month data represent a typical decision-making scenario where early results from a clinical trial are extrapolated. Mature historical trial data with the same comparator as in the pivotal trial were incorporated in 2 stages. First, the parametric distribution selection was based on the historical trial data. Second, the shape parameter estimate of the historical trial was used to define an informative a priori distribution for the shape of the 30-month pivotal trial data. The method was compared with standard approaches, fitting parametric distributions to the 30-month data with noninformative prior. The predicted survival of each method was compared with the observed survival (ΔAUC) in the 75-month trial data. RESULTS: The Weibull had the best fit to the historical trial and the log-normal to the 30-month pivotal trial data. The ΔAUC of the Weibull with informative priors was considerably smaller compared with the standard Weibull. Also, the predicted median survival based on the Weibull with informative priors was more accurate (melphalan and prednisone [MP] 40 months, and bortezomib [V] combined with MP [VMP] 62 months) than based on the standard Weibull (MP 45 months and VMP 72 months) when compared with the observed median (MP 41.3 months and VMP 56.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: Extrapolation of clinical trial data is improved by using historical trial data-based informative a priori distributions.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs in amyloid light-chain amyloidosis: a real-world study using US claims data.

AIM: To estimate healthcare utilization and costs in amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis. PATIENTS & METHODS: AL amyloidosis patients were identified in 2007-2015 claims databases if they had ≥1 inpatient/≥2 outpatient claims consistent with AL amyloidosis and received ≥1 AL-specific treatment. Descriptive statistics were reported. RESULTS: 50.1% (n = 3670) were admitted ≥1 time during the year, 11.3% (n = 827) ≥3 times. From 2007 to 2015, bortezomib use increased from 4.6 to 25.3%; melphalan use decreased from 18.9 to 2.0%; costs increased from 92,866 to $114,030. Among incident patients with at least 2 years of follow-up, healthcare utilization and costs decreased from first to second year post-diagnosis. CONCLUSION: AL chemotherapy-based prescribing practices changed. Total annual healthcare costs increased over time among AL amyloidosis patients.

Treatment of sporadic Burkitt lymphoma in adults, a retrospective comparison of four treatment regimens.

Burkitt lymphoma is an aggressive B cell malignancy accounting for 1-2% of all adult lymphomas. Treatment with dose-intensive, multi-agent chemotherapy is effective but associated with considerable toxicity. In this observational study, we compared real-world efficacy, toxicity, and costs of four frequently employed treatment strategies for Burkitt lymphoma: the Lymphome Malins B (LMB), the Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster (BFM), the HOVON, and the CODOX-M/IVAC regimens. We collected data from 147 adult patients treated in eight referral centers. Following central pathology assessment, 105 of these cases were accepted as Burkitt lymphoma, resulting in the following treatment groups: LMB 36 patients, BFM 19 patients, HOVON 29 patients, and CODOX-M/IVAC 21 patients (median age 39 years, range 14-74; mean duration of follow-up 47 months). There was no significant difference between age, sex ratio, disease stage, or percentage HIV-positive patients between the treatment groups. Five-year progression-free survival (69%, p = 0.966) and 5-year overall survival (69%, p = 0.981) were comparable for all treatment groups. Treatment-related toxicity was also comparable with only hepatotoxicity seen more frequently in the CODOX/M-IVAC group (p = 0.004). Costs were determined by the number of rituximab gifts and the number of inpatients days. Overall, CODOX-M/IVAC had the most beneficial profile with regards to costs, treatment duration, and percentage of patients completing planned treatment. We conclude that the four treatment protocols for Burkitt lymphoma yield nearly identical results with regards to efficacy and safety but differ in treatment duration and costs. These differences may help guide future choice of treatment.

Mixed outpatient-inpatient autologous stem cell transplant for multiple myeloma: A cost-saving initiative in a resource constrained environment.

Background Although administration of chemotherapy prior to autologous stem cell transplantation in the outpatient setting has been reported as safe and cost-effective, many limitations exist with previously reported methods of transitioning out of the hospital ward. Specifically, lack of a caregiver and distance from treatment facility are key factors particularly in rural settings. Given these limitations, not all institutions have transitioned the transplant process, or even portions of it, to the outpatient setting despite the known benefits. Methods To achieve financial benefit without compromising safety, a novel mixed outpatient-inpatient model was adopted at our institution. Eligible patients receive melphalan in the clinic the day prior to being admitted for peripheral blood stem cell re-infusion where they remain until recovery of myelosuppression. Results In the year since implementation, nineteen total patients received high-dose melphalan prior to autologous stem cell transplantation. Eighteen of these patients successfully received melphalan in the outpatient clinic with admission to the hospital on day zero for infusion of stem cells. No patient experienced any adverse event on the day or evening of chemotherapy or required early admission. The average estimated total reduction in cost per patient to the institution was over US$2,000. When comparing the cost of the chemotherapy drug, melphalan, from the year before and the year after implementation of the mixed model the total annual cost saving was approximately US$90,00 or 53% of the previous year's expenditure. Conclusions The implementation of this mixed outpatient-inpatient model was safe, feasible, and cost-effective.

Comparative cost-effectiveness models for the treatment of multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: To compare cost effectiveness models for the first-line treatment of multiple myeloma, and explore the differences between the models' structure, parameters, assumptions and results. METHODS: Three cost effectiveness models for the treatment of multiple myeloma, were compared that had been developed to inform resource allocation in the UK for the chemotherapy regimens bortezomib, melphalan and prednisolone (BMP); and melphalan, prednisolone and thalidomide (MPT) versus melphalan and prednisolone (MP). The models used alternative approaches and assumptions to estimate the overall survival and progression-free survival for each of the interventions. Through the use of sensitivity analyses, the most influential parameters and assumptions of each of the models were identified. RESULTS: The models developed by the manufacturers gave conflicting results, with each manufacturer favouring their drug. The differences between the model results were determined by two parameters: the hazard ratio for overall survival for MPT vs. MP and the cost of bortezomib. CONCLUSIONS: Using models developed for assessing treatments for multiple myeloma we demonstrated that it was feasible to compare models, which then aided decision makers in making reimbursement decisions.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bortezomib and thalidomide in combination regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common haematological cancer in the UK. MM is not curable but can be treated with a combination of supportive measures and chemotherapy that aim to extend the duration and quality of survival. The majority of patients are not able to withstand intensive treatment, such as high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT), and so they are offered single-agent or combination chemotherapy. Combination therapies typically include chemotherapy with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid. More recently, combination therapies have incorporated drugs such as thalidomide (Thalidomide Celgene®, Celgene) and bortezomib (Velcade®, Janssen-Cilag). OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bortezomib or thalidomide in combination chemotherapy regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of MM. DATA SOURCES: Electronic bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library, were searched from 1999 to 2009 for English-language articles. Bibliographies of articles, grey literature sources and manufacturers' submissions were also searched. Experts in the field were asked to identify additional published and unpublished references. REVIEW METHODS: Titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility by two reviewers independently. The inclusion criteria specified in the protocol were applied to the full text of retrieved papers by one reviewer and checked independently by a second reviewer. Data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Differences in opinion were resolved through discussion at each stage. A cost-utility decision-analytic model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness estimates of bortezomib in combination with melphalan and prednisolone/prednisone (VMP), thalidomide in combination with cyclophosphamide and attenuated dexamethasone (CTDa), and thalidomide in combination with melphalan and prednisolone/prednisone (MPT) versus melphalan and prednisolone/prednisone (MP). RESULTS: A total of 1436 records were screened and 40 references were retrieved for the systematic review of clinical effectiveness. Five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria for the review: one RCT evaluated VMP, three evaluated MPT and one evaluated CTDa. The comparator in all of the included trials was MP. The review found that VMP and MPT can both be considered more clinically effective than MP for the first-line treatment of MM in people for whom high-dose therapy and SCT would not be appropriate. CTDa was more effective than MP in terms of complete response but data on survival outcomes did not meet the inclusion criteria. Cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that MPT has a greater probability of being cost-effective than either VMP or CTDa. LIMITATIONS: For most RCTs, details needed to judge study quality were incompletely reported. All studies stated that the analyses followed intention-to-treat principles but none adequately reported data censoring. Only one RCT contributed data on VMP and the published peer-reviewed follow-up data were immature. For MPT, overall survival data from two trials were eligible for inclusion but the doses of thalidomide differed between the trials and the treatment period was not reflective of current UK practice so the generalisability of the findings was uncertain. Two RCTs had a maintenance phase with thalidomide that did not meet the inclusion criteria so some of these results were not eligible for the review. Limited evidence on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was provided by the single trial of VMP versus MP. CONCLUSIONS: Service provision is unlikely to change greatly. As uncertainties remain, further research is needed regarding the use of bortezomib- and thalidomide-containing combination regimens. Head-to-head trials of bortezomib- and thalidomide-containing combination regimes are required, including assessments of patient HRQoL in response to treatment. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Combined submyeloablative and myeloablative dose intense melphalan results in satisfactory responses with acceptable toxicity in patients with multiple myeloma.

We studied in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and toxicity of a strategy of submyeloablative doses of Mel and stem cell support in the ambulatory setting, followed by a standard myeloablative dose transplant. Patients with recently diagnosed symptomatic MM received dexamethazone to induce clinical response. Cytokine mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) were split into 2 aliquots and cryopreserved. Patients then received Mel 100 mg/m(2) (Mel100) and infusion of the first PBPC aliquot in an ambulatory facility. Individuals received standard neutropenia prophylaxis and no growth factor support, but were seen regularly at the clinic until recovery. The cost of this step was calculated in a cohort of 23 patients where information for the expenditure was available. Six months later patients were conditioned in the hospital with Mel 200 mg/m(2) (Mel 200) followed by nfusion of the second aliquot. This study tested the cost, effectiveness, and the toxicity of out-patient-based transplantation, as well as the rate of response (complete remission [CR], very good partial remission [VGPR], partial remission [PR], and stable disease [SD]) and overall survival (OS) of this strategy. Twenty-six female and 16 male patients, with a median age of 53 years (range: 33-68 years) and median Salmon & Durie clinical disease stage III (range: II-III) were studied. The paraprotein was IgA in 17%, IgG in 52%, and light chains in 26%. The median harvested CD34(+) x 10(6) cells/kg was 12.03 (2.25-55.4). The median interval between the 2 transplant procedures was 239 (105-376) days. The median Karnofsky presentation score was 40%, but improved to 80% after the Mel 100 and was 90% following Mel 200. Subsequent to MEL 100 response was complete (CR) in 7 and it was VGPR in 9. Mel 100 grade 3-4 toxicity was mainly hematologic, but 15 (36%) required hospital admission for a median of 5 days. The median cost of MEL100 and corresponding supportive therapy was U.S. $2,142.35. In addition, the total median cost of those who needed admission to hospital was U.S. $6,042.78. Thus, pooling costs from patients who needed or did not need admissions the average cost of this strategy was U.S. $3,546.50 per patient. Among Mel 200 patients, except for hematologic toxicity, no patient had greater than grade 2 side effects. On completion of the program, 20 (48%) patients achieved CR, a further 14 (33%) had VGPR, whereas 6 had PR. At a median follow-up of 659 days there were 8 deaths, 1 (2%) was related to the treatment procedures and 6 from disease progression; thus, the 1000 days OS was 73%. Significant adverse factors included older age, lower presentation Hb, and lower Karnofsky %. Nonparametric testing confirmed that good performance scores and VGPR or CR were associated with more favorable outcome. Importantly, these satisfactory results were obtained in the absence of the new biologic cell modifiers. Mel 100 was well tolerated in the outpatient setting and the overall strategy seems to be effective in inducing durable responses with acceptable toxicity.

Whither the bone marrow transplant?

Bone marrow transplantation (BMT) has become an accepted and important medical intervention which has become a routine part of medical practice. Its utility has, however, been questioned recently in a number of diseases in which its role has been clearly established on the basis that there are better non-transplant therapeutic options. The suspicion that these moves to eradicate BMT as an option may not stem from purely scientific reasons has prompted the preparation of these personal reflections. I will focus this discussion only on two diseases in which BMT has been shown to be useful: chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) and multiple myeloma (MM).

Treatment of 72 newly diagnosed Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia cases with oral melphalan, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone: results and cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current treatment regimens for Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) are based on the use of oral alkylating agents. Recently, however, other more costly agents have been proposed for the treatment of WM. In the current study, the authors report on results obtained using oral melphalan, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone (MCP) to treat 72 patients with WM, and they compare these results (and the associated costs) with those observed using more aggressive protocols. METHODS: Between July 1973 and April 2002, the authors documented overexpression of the immunoglobulin M paraprotein in 317 consecutive patients. Of these, 100 had newly diagnosed WM, and the 72 who were symptomatic were treated using the MCP protocol. Response rate, overall survival (OS), response duration, freedom from progression (FFP), event-free survival (EFS) duration, toxicity, and cost per course in Euro and U.S. dollars were evaluated for patients receiving this regimen. RESULTS: Seventy-one of 72 patients (99%) were evaluable. Of these patients, 55 (77%) achieved a response; 7 others (10%) experienced disease stabilization, and the remaining 9 (13%) experienced disease progression. After a median follow-up of 72 months (range, 3-195 months), the median durations of EFS, FFP, response, and OS were 47, 55, 64, and 66 months, respectively. No World Health Organization Grade III or IV toxicities were observed, and side effects were limited to transient nausea, emesis, and mild neutropenia. The cost per course of the MCP regimen was $16, similar to that of standard protocols involving chlorambucil and much less than that of more aggressive protocols (price range, $91-11091) proposed for the treatment of WM. CONCLUSIONS: Like chlorambucil-based protocols, the MCP regimen is a cost-effective and safe option for the treatment of patients with WM. Furthermore, the results obtained do not appear to be inferior to those yielded by more expensive, aggressive, and toxic intravenous protocols.

A cost-utility analysis comparing intensive chemotherapy alone to intensive chemotherapy followed by myeloablative chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell rescue in newly diagnosed patients with stage II/III multiple myeloma; a prospective randomised phase III study.

A prospective randomised phase III study in patients < or =65 years old with previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM), intensive chemotherapy followed by myeloablative chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell rescue was compared with intensive chemotherapy alone. This economic evaluation was based on detailed data from patient charts and hospital information systems. In the intention-to-treat analysis, mean total treatment and follow-up costs of the myeloablative treatment arm were 81,643 euros compared to 68,802 euros for the chemotherapy arm (P=0.09). Costs per quality-adjusted life year were 51,357 euros versus 37,328 euros. In the clinical study, no significant differences were found in overall survival after a median follow-up of 33 months from randomisation. Intensive chemotherapy is regarded as standard therapy for younger patients with previously untreated MM. Cost-effectiveness of myeloma therapy after 3 years of follow up seems not to be favoured by myeloablative treatment with autologous stem-cell rescue.

Melphalan for the treatment of patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer.

The purpose of this study was to determine the response to melphalan in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer after platinum-based therapy. This retrospective observational study analyzed 10 patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma treated with melphalan between August 1995 and April 2001. All had received primary platinum-based therapy. Nine of the 10 patients had chemosensitive disease. All but one patient had received one or more second-line therapies prior to melphalan. The median time to recurrence after first-line therapy was 26 months (range, 3-68). Treatment with melphalan resulted in 2 (20%) complete responses and 1 (10%) partial response (response rate, 30%; 95% CI 8%, 65%). The median progression-free interval after initiation of melphalan therapy was 8 months (range, 3-23). The most common side effects were grade I thrombocytopenia (20% of courses) and grade II leukopenia (18% of courses). The use of melphalan as palliative chemotherapy in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer results in response rates similar to those reported with other more expensive agents. Melphalan at the doses reported here has a favorable toxicity profile.

Treatments for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: analysis of survival data and cost-effectiveness evaluation.

The main therapeutic options currently available to induce remission in newly diagnosed cases of multiple myeloma include: i) melphalan at conventional doses without concurrent administration of interferon; ii) melphalan at conventional dose combined with interferon; iii) autologous bone marrow transplantation (ABMT). We conducted an analysis of the survival data reported in five large-scale published clinical trials and we evaluated the cost-effectiveness ratio. We determined the mean lifetime survival (MLS) for each treatment group using the Gompertz model. The cost data of patients given ABMT or standard chemotherapy were estimated from published information. The values of MLS were 3.47 years per patient for melphalan at conventional doses without interferon, 3.74 years for melphalan at conventional doses combined with interferon, and 7.28 years for ABMT. As compared with conventional melphalan treatment, ABMT yielded a significantly better survival. Survival after melphalan combined with interferon was not significantly different from that following melphalan alone. Using melphalan at conventional doses without interferon as reference term, the marginal cost-effectiveness ratio of ABMT was of about $26,000 per life year gained. For the induction treatment in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma, ABMT seems to be more effective and more cost-effective than the standard treatment with melphalan at conventional doses.

Costs of intensive treatment and follow-up of patients with multiple myeloma.

In a retrospective study, we calculated the treatment and follow-up costs of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The total treatment programme consisted of eight phases: VAD or VAMP chemotherapy, follow-up I, high-dose melphalan followed by transplantation of whole blood, follow-up II, collection of peripheral blood progenitor cells by leukapheresis, follow-up III, high-dose chemotherapy (busulfan/cyclophosphamide) followed by reinfusion of peripheral stem cells and follow-up IV (until 3 months from hospital discharge after peripheral stem cell transplantation). For each phase the average costs were calculated for all patients who were on treatment/follow-up in each particular phase. The total average cumulative costs of treatment and follow-up of all patients amounted to US$49850. Considering only the patients who completed the total treatment programme as it was scheduled, the average total treatment and follow-up costs were US$44800. The average costs of treatment and follow-up of patients who did not complete the programme as it was scheduled (patients who died, patients who were withdrawn from treatment and patients who received additional treatment) were US$57025.

Cost-utility analysis of melphalan plus prednisone with or without interferon-alpha 2b in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Results from a randomised controlled trial.

This study evaluated the cost utility of adding interferon-alpha 2b to conventional treatment in patients with multiple myeloma. It also provides a methodology for transforming complex quality-of-life profiles into a single index value on the conventional 0 to 1 quality-adjusted life-year scale (QALY). From 1990 to 1992, 583 patients with newly diagnosed, symptomatic multiple myeloma were enrolled in a randomised, multicentre, phase III study to evaluate the addition of interferon-alpha 2b to treatment with melphalan and prednisone. Addition of interferon-alpha 2b yielded a 12% increase in median survival time, at the expense of a slight reduction in quality of life during the first year of treatment. The gain in survival time was not large enough to reach statistical significance. Patients receiving interferon-alpha 2b also had a 5- to 6-month prolongation of the plateau phase. Cost per QALY gained by adding interferon-alpha 2b was conservatively estimated at $US110,000. Potentially better cost effectiveness may be found in different treatment regimens or in certain patient subgroups.

Single-agent high-dose melphalan salvage therapy for Hodgkin's disease: cost, safety, and long-term efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on the cost, safety, and long-term efficacy of single-agent high-dose melphalan (HDM) followed by autologous bone marrow (ABMT) or blood stem cell (ABSCT) transplantation in the salvage therapy of Hodgkin's disease (HD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From February 1981 to September 1996, 23 patients with relapsed (n = 15) or refractory (n = 8) HD received salvage therapy with HDM 140-200 mg/m2 followed by non-cryopreserved ABMT (n = 18) or cryopreserved ABSCT (n = 5). The cost of HDM/ABSCT in 1996, from initial consultation until transfer back to referring physician, was determined and compared to the estimate costs of two multi-agent regimens commonly used for HD. RESULTS: HDM was well tolerated with no early transplant-related mortality. The five-year overall and progression-free survival rates were 52% and 50%, respectively. The average total cost in Canadian funds of HDM/ABSCT in 1996 was $34,400/patient. This cost was estimated to be $4,700-6,800 cheaper per patient than the multi-agent high-dose regimens. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that HDM is safe, feasible, active, and reasonably inexpensive salvage therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory HD.