Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk ; 23(4): 259-265, 2023 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36775698

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Yttrium-90 ibritumomab tiuxetan [(90)Y-IT] is a CD20-targeted radio-immunotherapeutic agent. It has shown an excellent therapeutic activity with high tolerability against previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) and marginal zone B cell lymphoma (MZL). It is an attractive therapeutic option as the treatment schedule is short and convenient. The aim of our study is to determine the cost-effectiveness of (90)Y-IT in comparison to the standard-of-care bendamustine + rituximab (BR) in the first-line treatment of low-grade FL (LG-FL) and MZL in the real world. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included all patients who were treated with standard-dose (90)Y-IT for previously untreated LG-FL and MZL at the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (N = 51). A comparator arm with a historical cohort of previously untreated LG-FL and MZL patients who received BR was used (N = 92). RESULTS: Inverse propensity weighting was utilized to balance the 2 study arms. There were no differences in terms of overall response rate (100% vs. 98%, P = .18), complete response rate (94% vs. 95%, P = .91), or 5 years progression-free survival (76% vs. 75%, P = .63) between patients who received (90)Y-IT and BR, respectively. Within the first year, patients who received (90)Y-IT required an average of 4.5 fewer oncology clinic visits (P < .001), an average of 10 fewer days of therapeutic use (P < .001), and 40% less use of growth factors (P < .001) as compared to the BR group. The direct therapeutic cost of (90)Y-IT treatment was 54% less than that of 6 cycles of BR. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that (90) Y-IT is more cost-effective than BR and is a viable alternative in up-front management of LG-FL and MZL.


Assuntos
Linfoma de Zona Marginal Tipo Células B , Linfoma Folicular , Humanos , Rituximab/farmacologia , Rituximab/uso terapêutico , Cloridrato de Bendamustina/farmacologia , Cloridrato de Bendamustina/uso terapêutico , Análise Custo-Benefício , Radioimunoterapia , Radioisótopos de Ítrio/uso terapêutico , Linfoma Folicular/tratamento farmacológico , Linfoma Folicular/radioterapia , Linfoma Folicular/patologia , Linfoma de Zona Marginal Tipo Células B/patologia
2.
Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk ; 21(11): 766-774, 2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34334330

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The Alliance A041202/CCTG CLC.2 trial demonstrated superior progression-free survival with ibrutinib-based therapy compared to chemoimmunotherapy with bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in previously untreated older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. We completed a prospective trial-based economic analysis of Canadian patients to study the direct medical costs and quality-adjusted benefit associated with these therapies. METHODS: Mean survival was calculated using the restricted mean survival method from randomization to the study time-horizon of 24 months. Health state utilities were collected using the EuroQOL EQ-5D instrument with Canadian tariffs applied to calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were applied to resource utilization data (expressed in 2019 US dollars). We examined costs and QALYs associated ibrutinib, ibrutinib with rituximab (IR), and BR therapy. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients were enrolled; two patients were excluded from the analysis. On-protocol costs (associated with protocol-specified resource use) were higher for patients receiving ibrutinib (mean $189,335; P < 0.0001) and IR (mean $219,908; P < 0.0001) compared to BR (mean $51,345), driven by higher acquisition costs for ibrutinib. Total mean costs (over 2-years) were $192,615 with ibrutinib, $223,761 with IR, and $55,413 with BR (P < 0.0001 for ibrutinib vs. BR and P < 0.0001 for IR vs. BR). QALYs were similar between the three treatment arms: 1.66 (0.16) for ibrutinib alone, 1.65 (0.24) for IR, and 1.66 (0.17) for BR; therefore, a formal cost-utility analysis was not conducted. CONCLUSIONS: Direct medical costs are higher for patients receiving ibrutinib-based therapies compared to chemoimmunotherapy in frontline chronic lymphocytic leukemia, with the cost of ibrutinib representing a key driver.


Assuntos
Adenina/análogos & derivados , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Cloridrato de Bendamustina/economia , Cloridrato de Bendamustina/uso terapêutico , Leucemia Linfocítica Crônica de Células B/tratamento farmacológico , Leucemia Linfocítica Crônica de Células B/economia , Piperidinas/economia , Piperidinas/uso terapêutico , Rituximab/economia , Rituximab/uso terapêutico , Adenina/economia , Adenina/farmacologia , Adenina/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/farmacologia , Cloridrato de Bendamustina/farmacologia , Feminino , Humanos , Leucemia Linfocítica Crônica de Células B/mortalidade , Masculino , Piperidinas/farmacologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Rituximab/farmacologia , Análise de Sobrevida , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Acta Clin Croat ; 57(3): 542-553, 2018 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31168188

RESUMO

- The aim of this review is to present data on bendamustine, a non-cross resistant alkylating agent, alone or in combination for treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Bendamustine is currently approved for rituximab-resistant indolent NHL and CLL in patients not fit for conventional chemotherapy. Recent studies have shown superiority of bendamustine combination with rituximab (B-R) in first line treatment of indolent NHLs and mantle cell lymphoma, suggesting a shift of the standard of care in this setting. B-R regimen has also shown efficacy in relapsed setting suggesting the possible treatment option for patients failing conventional chemotherapy. In rituximab-resistant NHL, the recent GADOLIN study exploring the addition of obinutuzumab to bendamustine has yielded impressive result changing the standard of care in this hard-to-treat population. Concerning CLL, despite inferiority to the standard of care in young fit patients, as defined in CLL10 study, B-R has yielded a more beneficial toxicity profile and its use in first line treatment should be decided individually. In relapsed setting, the addition of ibrutinib to B-R has shown superior results compared to B-R alone, possibly changing the paradigm of treatment of relapsed CLL. In conclusion, bendamustine as a single agent or in combinations has shown activity with acceptable toxic profile in the treatment of patients with indolent NHLs or CLL without del(17p) mutation.


Assuntos
Cloridrato de Bendamustina/farmacologia , Leucemia Linfocítica Crônica de Células B/tratamento farmacológico , Linfoma não Hodgkin/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Antineoplásicos Alquilantes/farmacologia , Criança , Humanos , Conduta do Tratamento Medicamentoso
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA