Cost-effectiveness of novel relapsed-refractory multiple myeloma therapies in Norway: lenalidomide plus dexamethasone vs bortezomib.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness (cost per additional life-year [LY] and quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (LEN/DEX) compared with bortezomib for the treatment of relapsed-refractory multiple myeloma (rrMM) in Norway. METHODS: A discrete-event simulation model was developed to predict patients? disease course using patient data, best response, and efficacy levels obtained from LEN/DEX MM-009/-010 trials and the bortezomib (APEX) published clinical trial. Predictive equations for time-to-progression (TTP) and post-progression survival (PPS) were developed by identifying the best fitting parametric survival distributions and selecting the most significant predictors. Disease and adverse event management was obtained via survey from Norwegian experts. Costs, derived from official Norwegian pricing data bases, included drug, administration, monitoring, and adverse event management costs. RESULTS: Complete or partial responders were 65% for LEN/DEX compared to 43% for bortezomib. Derived median TTP was 11.45 months for LEN/DEX compared to 5.15 months for bortezomib. LYs and QALYs were higher for LEN/DEX (4.06 and 2.95, respectively) than for bortezomib (3.11 and 2.19, respectively). The incremental costs per QALY and LY gained from LEN/DEX were NOK 247,978 and NOK 198,714, respectively, compared to bortezomib. Multiple sensitivity analyses indicated the findings were stable. The parameters with the greatest impact were 4-year time horizon (NOK 441,457/QALY) and higher bound confidence intervals for PPS (NOK 118,392). LIMITATIONS: The model analyzed two therapies not compared in head-to-head trials, and predicted results using an equation incorporating patient-level characteristics. It is a limited estimation of the costs and outcomes in a Norwegian setting. CONCLUSIONS: The simulation model showed that treatment with LEN/DEX leads to greater LYs and QALYs when compared to bortezomib in the treatment of rrMM patients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio indicated treatment with LEN/DEX to be cost-effective and was the basis of the reimbursement approval of LEN/DEX in Norway.

Health insurance coverage in Central and Eastern Europe: trends and challenges.

Health insurance systems in Central and Eastern Europe have evolved in different ways from the centralized health systems inherited from the Soviet era, but there remain common trends and challenges in the region. Health spending is low in comparison to the spending of pre-2004 European Union members, but population aging, medical technology, economic growth, and heightened expectations will generate major spending pressures. Social health insurance is the dominant model in the region, but coverage is uneven. Key3reform issues include identifying ways to encourage additional investment in the health sector; and defining formal benefit packages, copayments, and the role of private insurance.