The Zero-Price Conundrum: Exploration of Scenarios Where a Clinically Effective New Drug Might Not Be Cost-Effective at Zero Price.

OBJECTIVES: The zero-price conundrum occurs when a clinically effective drug can justify no greater than a price of zero based on cost-effectiveness criteria from a health system perspective. This is relevant for health systems that require evidence of cost-effectiveness, in addition to safety and efficacy for drug approval and other analyses that may shape drug coverage policies, such as budget impact and comparative effectiveness. This study aimed to clarify and explore the zero-price conundrum to provide a resource in the development of practical and methodological solutions. METHODS: We specified equations representing previously identified zero-price scenarios and used them to elucidate factors contributing to the zero-price conundrum and explore relationships between them. We present real-world considerations and discuss solutions from the literature. RESULTS: The analyses demonstrated that a primary cause of the zero-price problem for a new drug that increases quality-adjusted survival pertains to healthcare costs beyond the influence of the new drug, specifically, disease background costs, costs of existing drugs used in a combination regimen, and costs of future health interventions patients may become eligible to receive. Pragmatic solutions have been to exclude such costs from cost-effectiveness analyses. Proposed modifications to cost-effectiveness analysis include assessing each drug in a combination regimen based on its relative contribution to improved health. CONCLUSIONS: The zero-price dilemma may arise more frequently as the number of drugs in high-cost disease areas continues to grow. As cost-effectiveness methods evolve, there is the opportunity to develop robust solutions that can be applied consistently.

Efficacy of non-intensive therapies approved for relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic literature review.

Aim: De novo relapsed and/or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (rrAML) has limited treatment options for patients not eligible ('unfit') to receive intensive chemotherapy-based interventions. The authors aimed to summarize outcomes for licensed therapies in this setting. Materials & methods: A systematic literature review identified licensed therapies in this setting. A feasibility assessment was made to conduct a network meta-analysis to evaluate comparative efficacy. Results: Seven unique trials were identified. Median survival months were 13.8 for gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO), 9.3 for gilteritinib (FLT3 mutated rrAML), 5.6 for low-dose cytarabine and 3.2 for best supportive care; transplant rates with gilteritinib and GO were 25.5 and 19%, respectively. A network meta-analysis was not feasible. Conclusion: There remains a high unmet need in de novo rrAML patients not eligible for intensive therapy, with GO and gilteritinib (only FLT3-mutated AML) providing the best current options.

Some patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have no response to initial treatment or have a response that is subsequently lost. Follow-on treatment options after that initial stage are limited, especially for patients who are not able to have intensive therapy, such as chemotherapy, due to age, physical or cognitive function, existing comorbidities or symptoms. This study aimed to review the published literature to identify data associated with treatments that are licensed for use in patients ineligible for intensive therapy who do not maintain a response from their initial therapy. The study found that the drug gilteritinib was an option for the subgroup of AML patients with FLT3-mutated disease with an average life expectancy just under 1 year, while gemtuzumab ozogamicin was an option for a wider group of AML patients with a life expectancy just over 1 year. Between a fifth and a quarter of patients went on to receive a stem-cell transplant after treatment with one of these. With limited options, this patient group needs further attention; however, the availability of the previously mentioned treatments is promising.

Cost Effectiveness of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin in the First-Line Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukaemia in the UK.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The phase III ALFA-0701 study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) versus standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy (daunorubicin and cytarabine) for the treatment of adult patients with de novo CD33+ acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). This study analysed the cost-effectiveness of GO from the perspective of the UK health care payer. METHODS: A cohort state-transition model was developed to estimate direct health care costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a lifetime time horizon from AML diagnosis to death using monthly cycles. Data on complete remission, overall survival, relapse-free survival (RFS), haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, and adverse events for GO plus SOC versus SOC were obtained from the ALFA-0701 study. Overall survival and RFS were extrapolated beyond the trial horizon using mixture cure models. Unit costs were obtained from standard national sources. Utilities were identified in a systematic literature review. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. Analyses were performed for the base-case population, excluding patients with an unfavourable cytogenetic profile, and the overall population. RESULTS: For the base-case and overall populations respectively, incremental per-patient costs (£13,456 and £14,773) and QALYs (0.99 and 0.68) for GO plus SOC versus SOC resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of £13,561 and £21,819 per QALY gained. The mean probabilistic ICERs were £14,217 and £23,245, respectively. Univariate sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: The ICERs for both populations met NICE's £20,000-£30,000 willingness-to-pay threshold for medicines and supported the current approval for GO.

Bosutinib for pretreated patients with chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia: primary results of the phase 4 BYOND study.

Bosutinib is approved for newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) chronic phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and for Ph+ CP, accelerated (AP), or blast (BP) phase CML after prior treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). In the ongoing phase 4 BYOND study (NCT02228382), 163 CML patients resistant/intolerant to prior TKIs (n = 156 Ph+ CP CML, n = 4 Ph+ AP CML, n = 3 Ph-negative/BCR-ABL1+ CML) received bosutinib 500 mg once daily (starting dose). As of ≥1 year after last enrolled patient (median treatment duration 23.7 months), 56.4% of Ph+ CP CML patients remained on bosutinib. Primary endpoint of cumulative confirmed major cytogenetic response (MCyR) rate by 1 year was 75.8% in Ph+ CP CML patients after one or two prior TKIs and 62.2% after three prior TKIs. Cumulative complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) and major molecular response (MMR) rates by 1 year were 80.6% and 70.5%, respectively, in Ph+ CP CML patients overall. No patient progressed to AP/BP on treatment. Across all patients, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea (87.7%), nausea (39.9%), and vomiting (32.5%). The majority of patients had confirmed MCyR by 1 year and MMR by 1 year, further supporting bosutinib use for Ph+ CP CML patients resistant/intolerant to prior TKIs.