Real-world outcomes with fedratinib therapy in patients who discontinued ruxolitinib for primary myelofibrosis.

Aim: Fedratinib is an oral selective JAK2 inhibitor approved in the USA for the treatment of adult patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk primary or secondary myelofibrosis (MF). Methods: This observational study assessed adult US patients who received ruxolitinib for primary MF (Flatiron Health database: 1 January 2011-31 October 2020). Patients were stratified by post-ruxolitinib treatment (fedratinib vs non-fedratinib). Results: Characteristics were comparable between fedratinib (n=70) and non-fedratinib (n=159) groups (median age: 71.0 vs 70.0 years; females: 55.7 vs 50.3%; median follow-up: 7.0 vs 6.0 months). Median overall survival (not reached vs 17 months) and 12 month survival (71.6 vs 53.5%) were improved with fedratinib versus the non-fedratinib therapies. Conclusion: In MF patients who received frontline ruxolitinib, survival was improved with subsequent fedratinib versus non-fedratinib care.

Health state utilities for beta-thalassemia: a time trade-off study.

BACKGROUND: Beta-thalassemia (BT) is an inherited blood disorder characterized by reduced levels of functional hemoglobin resulting in phenotypes ranging from clinically asymptomatic to severely anemic. Patients with BT may require lifelong regular blood transfusions supported by appropriate iron chelation therapy (ICT). This study aimed to determine how the UK general population values BT health states associated with differing transfusion burden and ICT. METHODS: Composite time trade-off (cTTO) methodology was employed to elicit health state utilities in BT. Relevant BT literature related to symptom and quality-of-life impact, including physical, functional, and emotional well-being, and safety profiles of BT treatments were considered when drafting health state descriptions. Eleven health state descriptions were developed and validated by hematologists and patient advocates for clinical accuracy and completeness. 200 individuals from the UK general population participated in the cTTO interviews. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 41.50 years (SD 16.01, range 18-81); 88 (46.8%) were female. Utility values ranged from 0.78 (SD 0.34) for non-transfusion dependent BT with oral ICT to 0.37 (SD 0.50) for high transfusion burden with subcutaneous ICT in transfusion-dependent BT. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides health utilities for a range of BT health states from the UK general population perspective. Importantly, lower transfusion burden and lower burden of anemia were associated with higher utilities. To a lesser extent, differential modes of ICT were found to impact utility valuations in patients with BT. The utilities obtained in this study can be employed as inputs in cost-effectiveness analyses of BT therapies.

Personal and societal costs of multiple sclerosis in the UK: A population-based MS Registry study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate through survey and data linkage, healthcare resource use and costs (except drugs), including who bears the cost, of multiple sclerosis in the United Kingdom by disease severity and type. METHODS: The United Kingdom Multiple Sclerosis Register deployed a cost of illness survey, completed by people with multiple sclerosis and linked this with data within the United Kingdom Multiple Sclerosis Register and from their hospital records. Resource consumption was categorised as being medical or non-medical and costed by National Health Service and social services estimates for 2018. RESULTS: We calculated £509,003 in non-medical costs over a year and £435,488 in medical costs generated over 3 months. People with multiple sclerosis reported self-funding 75% of non-medical costs with non-medical interventions having long-term potential benefits. Costs increased with disability as measured by patient-reported Expanded Disability Status Score and Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale, with Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale physical being a more powerful predictor of costs than the patient-reported Expanded Disability Status Score. Two distinct groups were identified: medical and non-medical interventions (n = 138); and medical interventions only (n = 399). The medical and non-medical group reported increased disease severity and reduced employment but incurred 80% more medical costs per person than the medical-only group. CONCLUSIONS: The importance of disability in driving costs is illustrated with balance between medical and non-medical costs consistent with the United Kingdom health environment. People with multiple sclerosis and their families fund a considerable proportion of non-medical costs but non-medical interventions with longer term impact could affect future medical costs.