ABSTRACT
In the absence of head-to-head trials, an indirect-treatment comparison can estimate the treatment effect of tisagenlecleucel in comparison with blinatumomab on rates of complete remission (CR) and overall survival (OS) in patients with relapsed or primary refractory (R/R) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Patient-level data from two pivotal trials, ELIANA (tisagenlecleucel; n = 79) and MT103-205 (blinatumomab; n = 70), were used in comparisons of CR and OS, controlling for cross-trial difference in available patient characteristics. Five different adjustment approaches were implemented: stabilized inverse probability of treatment weight (sIPTW); trimmed sIPTW; stratification by propensity score quintiles; adjustment for prognostic factors; and adjustment for both prognostic factors and propensity score. Comparative analyses indicate that treatment with tisagenlecleucel was associated with a statistically significant higher likelihood of achieving CR and lower hazard of death than treatment with blinatumomab. The tisagenlecleucel group exhibited a higher likelihood of CR than the blinatumomab group in every analysis regardless of adjustment approach (odds ratios: 6.71-9.76). Tisagenlecleucel was also associated with a lower hazard of death than blinatumomab in every analysis, ranging from 68% to 74% lower hazard of death than with blinatumomab, determined using multiple adjustment approaches (hazard ratios: 0.26-0.32). These findings support the growing body of clinical trials and real-world evidence demonstrating that tisagenlecleucel is an important treatment option for children and young adults with R/R ALL.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Bispecific , Antineoplastic Agents , Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma , Antibodies, Bispecific/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Child , Humans , Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma/drug therapy , Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell , Young AdultABSTRACT
Hemophilia B is a rare congenital blood disorder characterized by factor IX deficiency. Clinical profiles of hemophilia B range from mild to severe forms of the disease. The objective of this study was to characterize the economic burden associated with differing clinical profiles of hemophilia B from a US health system perspective. Using the IBM MarketScan database (June 2011-February 2019), a claims-based algorithm was developed to identify 4 distinct profiles (mild, moderate, moderate-severe, and severe) in adult males with hemophilia B based on the frequency of hemorrhage events and factor IX replacement claims. Mean annual health care resource use (HRU) and costs were statistically compared between patients with hemophilia B (N = 454) and 1:1 demographic-matched controls (N = 454), both overall and with stratification by clinical profile. Compared with matched controls, patients with hemophilia B had a significantly higher comorbidity burden (Charlson Comorbidity Index, mean ± standard deviation [SD]: 0.9 ± 1.7 vs 0.3 ± 0.9, P < .001). Across all clinical profiles, patients with hemophilia B had significantly higher HRU vs matched controls (mean ± SD: 0.3 ± 0.6 vs 0.1 ± 0.3 inpatient admissions; 0.6 ± 1.2 vs 0.2 ± 0.6 emergency department visits; 17.7 ± 22.9 vs 8.0 ± 11.0 outpatient visits; all P < .001). Annual total health care costs per patient among patients with hemophilia B were more than 25-fold higher vs matched controls (mean ± SD: $201 635 ± $411 530 vs $7879 ± $29 040, respectively, P < .001). Annual total health care costs per patient increased with increasing severity (mean ± SD: mild, $80 811 ± $284 313; moderate, $137 455 ± $222 021; moderate-severe, $251 619 ± $576 886; severe, $632 088 ± $501 270). The findings of this study highlight the substantial burden of illness associated with hemophilia B.
Subject(s)
Hemophilia B , Adult , Cost of Illness , Health Care Costs , Hemophilia B/epidemiology , Hemophilia B/therapy , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Pazopanib is approved in Latin America as first targeted therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: A retrospective chart review of adult patients with mRCC who initiated pazopanib as first targeted therapy between January 2011 and March 2016 was conducted among oncology care centers in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events were summarized. RESULTS: A total of 156 charts of patients with mRCC receiving first-line pazopanib were reviewed (29, 54, 27, 28, and 18 patients from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico, respectively). The mean age at initial mRCC diagnosis was 61.6 years, 73.7% were male, and 51.3% were Hispanic. The median dose of pazopanib was 800 mg and the median time from initial mRCC diagnosis to pazopanib start was 2.2 months. The median time on treatment was 10.0 months. At the time of data extraction, 16.7% of patients remained on pazopanib, with clinical progression listed as the main reason for discontinuation. Subsequent therapy was received by 25.6% of patients; the most common were everolimus (9.6%) and axitinib (5.8%). Overall, median PFS and OS were 10.8 and 16.9 months, respectively, and varied across countries. The most common all-grade adverse events were diarrhea (44.9%), asthenia/fatigue (43.6%), and nausea (28.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Pazopanib was used for first-line mRCC treatment in a clinically diverse patient population across Latin America. Real-world PFS and tolerability were similar to clinical studies of pazopanib. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Inc.