Economic Evaluation of a Tumour-Agnostic Therapy: Dutch Economic Value of Larotrectinib in TRK Fusion-Positive Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Larotrectinib is the first tumour-agnostic therapy that has been approved by the European Medicines Agency. Tumour-agnostic therapies are indicated for a multitude of tumour types. The economic models supporting reimbursement submissions of tumour-agnostic therapies are complex because of the multitude of indications per model. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of larotrectinib compared with standard of care in patients with cancer with tropomyosin receptor kinase fusion-positive tumour types in the Netherlands. METHODS: A previously constructed cost-effectiveness model with a partitioned survival approach was adapted to the Dutch setting, simulating costs and effects of treatment in patients with tropomyosin receptor kinase fusion-positive cancer. The cost-effectiveness model conducts a naïve comparison of larotrectinib to a weighted comparator standard-of-care arm. Dutch specific resource use and costs were implemented and inflated to reflect 2019 euros. The analysis includes a lifetime horizon and a societal perspective. RESULTS: Larotrectinib versus Dutch standard of care resulted in 5.61 incremental (QALYs) and €232,260 incremental costs, leading to an incremental cost-effectivenes ratio of €41,424/QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis reveals a 88% chance of larotrectinib being cost effective compared with the pooled comparator standard-of-care arm at the applicable €80,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold in the Netherlands. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental cost-effectivenes ratio was well below the applicable threshold for diseases with a high burden of disease in the Netherlands (€80,000). At this threshold, larotrectinib was estimated to be a cost-effective treatment for patients with tropomyosin receptor kinase fusion-positive cancer compared with current standard of care in the Netherlands.

A Delphi panel on treatment of high disease activity relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis in the Netherlands.

Aim: To gain insight into current treatment and barriers to optimal treatment for high disease activity relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) in the Netherlands. Materials & methods: A two-round Delphi panel using an online questionnaire was conducted. Seven MS neurologists from diverse locations in the Netherlands were invited to participate. Result: Out of the seven MS neurologists, five completed both questionnaire rounds. Conclusion: Effectiveness and side effects along with patient's lesion load were the most important factors for choosing a disease modifying therapy (DMTs). Respondents felt restricted to optimally treat their patients due to reimbursement restrictions for certain disease modifying therapies, although agreed that satisfactory treatment options are currently available. The answers show consensus between the participating MS neurologists with high certainty of answers.