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

5Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: 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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nikolaou, A., Ambavane, A., Shah, A., Ma, W., Tosh, J., Kapetanakis, V., … Samyshkin, Y. (2021). Belantamab mafodotin for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in heavily pretreated patients: a US cost-effectiveness analysis. Expert Review of Hematology, 14(12), 1137–1145. https://doi.org/10.1080/17474086.2021.1970522

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free