Patient Perspectives Regarding Allogeneic Bone Marrow Transplantation in Myelofibrosis.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) is a curative treatment for patients with myelofibrosis (MF); however, many HCT-eligible patients decline this potentially life-saving procedure. The reasons behind this decision are not clear. We sought to survey patients with MF to understand their perspective on HCT. A 63-question survey was posted on myeloproliferative neoplasm patient advocacy websites. A total of 129 patients with MF responded to the survey. Among these patients, 49 (41%) were referred for HCT, and 41(32%) attended the transplantation consult. Of the patients who attended the transplantation consult, 24 (59%) did not plan on going on to HCT, and 16 (41%) intended to proceed with HCT. Reasons for the decision to not undergo transplantation included the desire to not be ill, desire to not spend time in the hospital, and concerns about overall quality of life. Specifically, concerns related to financial impact and the risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) were expressed. Patients who decided to proceed with HCT felt that this would extend their survival and allow them to be around family for longer. This is the first survey to investigate patient perceptions regarding HCT for MF. Less than one-half of the patients were referred for HCT, and of those, less than one-half planned on proceeding with the transplantation, suggesting that many patients do not receive this life-saving procedure. Further exploration of the basis of patients' reluctance to proceed with HCT is warranted.

Cost-effectiveness of kinase inhibitors for hematologic malignancies: a systematic and critical review.

INTRODUCTION: Several genetic disruptions lead to constitutive activation of those kinases leukemic cells depend on for survival and proliferation. Kinase inhibitors (KI) are major therapeutic innovations for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), chronic lymphoid leukemia (CLL) and myelofibrosis (MF) providing a relevant improvement of quality-adjusted survival in patients with high-risk or refractory disease. CML patients are being treated with first-generation KI imatinib since many years, achieving expected survivals longer than 10 years. Second- and third generations KIs, such as nilotinib, dasatinib, ponatinib and bosutinib, recently expanded the therapeutic yield for CML and treatment discontinuation in patients with persistent deep molecular response is being pursued. Areas covered: This review summarizes available evidence on economic analyses of KI treatments for CML, CLL and MF aimed at identifying the key determinants of KI cost-effectiveness. Expert commentary: On converse, specific KIs for CLL and MF patients have been marketed only in the last few years. Ibrutinib and idelalisib allowed to improve the outcomes of relapsed/refractory CLL and of patients with poor genetic features, while the first-in-class JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib allowed to improve symptoms of advanced MF patients and to prolong survival in responders. In the current situation of healthcare budget restrictions worldwide, the value for cost of the above KIs has been questioned.

A Review of Ruxolitinib for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis: A Critique of the Evidence.

As part of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's (NICE) Single Technology Appraisal (STA) process, ruxolitinib was assessed to determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of its use in the treatment of disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adults with myelofibrosis. Ruxolitinib had previously been assessed as part of the STA process and was not recommended in NICE guidance issued in June 2013 (TA289). A review of TA289 was commissioned following the availability of new longer-term survival data; a price discount patient access scheme (PAS) was also introduced. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) and Centre for Health Economics (CHE) Technology Appraisal Group at the University of York was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article provides a summary of the manufacturer or sponsor of the technology's (referred to as the company) submission, the ERG review and the resulting NICE guidance issued in March 2016. The main clinical effectiveness data were derived from two good-quality multicentre randomised controlled trials (RCTs): COMFORT-II compared ruxolitinib with best available therapy (BAT) and COMFORT-I compared ruxolitinib with placebo. Both RCTs demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in splenomegaly and its associated symptoms in intermediate-2 and high-risk myelofibrosis patients. Overall survival was statistically significantly improved with ruxolitinib compared with BAT at 3.5 years of follow-up in the COMFORT-II trial (hazard ratio 0.58, 95 % CI 0.36-0.93). Grade 3-4 adverse events were more frequent in the ruxolitinib group than in the BAT group; 42 % compared with 25 %. Evidence relating to patients with lower-risk disease or low platelet counts (50-100 × 109/L) was less robust. The company's economic model was well-presented and had an appropriate model structure. The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated to be around £45,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (including the PAS discount). Extensive sensitivity and scenario analyses were presented, demonstrating that the estimated ICER was robust to a range of input values and assumptions made in the model. Alternative scenarios presented by the ERG showed only modest increases in the estimated ICER, primarily as a result of including an element of drug wastage within the model. Alternative scenarios resulted in estimated ICERs ranging from around £45,000 to £49,000 per QALY gained (including the PAS discount). At the first appraisal meeting, the NICE Appraisal Committee concluded that ruxolitinib was clinically effective and was a cost effective use of National Health Service (NHS) resources for patients with high-risk myelofibrosis who meet NICE's end-of-life criteria. Following the consultation, the company offered a revised PAS, resulting in a revised base-case ICER of £31,229 per QALY gained. The company also presented new evidence on the cost effectiveness of ruxolitinib in intermediate-2 and high-risk subgroups and a revised version of the model. The NICE Appraisal Committee considered the new evidence and recommended ruxolitinib for the treatment of patients with intermediate-2-risk disease as well as patients with high-risk disease, based on International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) prognostic factors.

Indirect and non-medical economic burden, quality-of-life, and disabilities of the myelofibrosis disease in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: Myelofibrosis is a non-frequent chronic myeloproliferative Philadelphia-negative chromosome neoplasm. It is a heavy incapacitating orphan disease and associated with high morbidity and mortality. In this context, indirect and non-medical costs are expected to be high. The main objective of this project is to estimate the economic burden of this disease in Spain. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with a diagnosis of myelofibrosis for at least 1 year participated in a questionnaire in three Spanish centers. The study consisted of analyzing in various aspects the cost and impact of the disease; indeed, daily life time limitations with a need of informal care, symtomatology. Additionally, information concerning the clinical management of the disease was collected through a focus group of eight experts. RESULTS: The mean age was 65 years. 15 of 33 patients were at their productive stage. Six had difficulties at work and eight have received informal care. Bone and muscular pain were the main symptoms of patients (72%). The estimated global indirect and non-medical costs of the disease were 86,315€ per patient (20% working and 80% informal care), which reached 104,153€ at productive stage patients (45%) and 168,459€ for more symptomatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of indirect and non-medical costs of myelofibrosis are important (15,142€/annual) as a result, and should be considered in economic evaluation, as well as in preventive plans for patients and caregivers, despite the fact that studies with larger numbers of patients should be done.

Ruxolitinib for the treatment of myelofibrosis: a NICE single technology appraisal.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of ruxolitinib (Novartis) to submit clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence for ruxolitinib within its licensed indication (the treatment of disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adult patients with myelofibrosis), according to the Institute's Single Technology Appraisal process. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and Centre for Health Economics at the University of York were commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article provides a description of the company submission, the ERG review and the resulting NICE guidance TA289 issued in June 2013. The ERG critically reviewed the evidence presented in the manufacturer's submission and identified areas requiring clarification, for which the manufacturer provided additional evidence. The main clinical effectiveness data were derived from two phase III, multicentre, randomised controlled trials (RCTs): Controlled myelofibrosis study with oral JAK inhibitor treatment (COMFORT)-II compared ruxolitinib with best available therapy (BAT), and COMFORT-I compared ruxolitinib with placebo. These RCTs demonstrated that ruxolitinib confers significant benefits in terms of spleen size reduction and improvement in symptom burden. In the COMFORT-II trial, a reduction in spleen volume of ≥35 % was achieved in 28 % of ruxolitinib-treated patients compared with 0 % of patients in the BAT group (p < 0.001) at 48 weeks, and there was a mean change in spleen volume of -30.1 versus +7.3 % (p < 0.001). Ruxolitinib also provided significant improvements in myelofibrosis-associated symptoms and health-related quality-of-life compared with BAT and placebo. The ERG concluded that ruxolitinib appears to reduce splenomegaly and its associated symptoms, but that there was considerable uncertainty surrounding the manufacturer's cost-effectiveness estimates due to limitations in the manufacturer's model. The manufacturer's model did not allow for disease progression, did not accurately capture symptomatic relief, had several implausible or unjustified assumptions, and there were several parameter choices that the ERG found sub-optimal. ERG sensitivity analyses found that nearly all plausible adjustments to the model reduced the cost effectiveness of ruxolitinib. It is very likely that the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £73,980/quality-adjusted life-year presented by the manufacturer represents a best-case scenario. The NICE Appraisal Committee concluded that ruxolitinib was clinically effective, but could not be considered a cost effective use of National Health Service (NHS) resources for treating disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adults with myelofibrosis. Ruxolitinib is not recommended for the treatment of disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adult patients with primary myelofibrosis (also known as chronic idiopathic myelofibrosis), post-polycythaemia vera myelofibrosis and post-essential thrombocythaemia myelofibrosis in NICE TA289.

Local and global returns from research in stem cells: the case of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.

As of July 2010, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CA, USA) had awarded US$1.1 billion to over 50 institutions which obtained $884.3 million in matching funds. Those grants have one-time and ongoing economic impacts: the former during the disbursement of the funds locally, while the latter result from structural changes and are global. For the period 2006-2014, one-time impacts in California (USA) are 24,000 jobs/year and $201 million in tax revenues for California ($362 million for the federal government). A grantee developed an inhibitor to treat polycythemia vera and primary myelofibrosis. The patients in remission who will return to work will cause an average increase of $94.4 million in California's annual personal income ($560.9 million for the USA) and tax revenues of $46.7 million over 10 years. The annual decrease in direct healthcare costs in California is $2.1 million. Grantees concentrate in two clusters--San Francisco and San Diego--strengthening California's leadership in stem cell research.