Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Versus Second-Line Use of Daratumumab in Older, Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Multiple Myeloma

The MAIA trial found that addition of daratumumab to lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd) significantly prolonged progression-free survival in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (Rd). However, daratumumab is a cost...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of clinical oncology Vol. 39; no. 10; pp. 1119 - 1128
Main Authors Patel, Kishan K, Giri, Smith, Parker, Terri L, Bar, Noffar, Neparidze, Natalia, Huntington, Scott F
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States 01.04.2021
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The MAIA trial found that addition of daratumumab to lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd) significantly prolonged progression-free survival in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (Rd). However, daratumumab is a costly treatment and is administered indefinitely until disease progression. Therefore, it is unclear whether it is cost-effective to use daratumumab in the first-line setting compared with reserving its use until later lines of therapy. We created a Markov model to compare healthcare costs and clinical outcomes of transplant-ineligible patients treated with daratumumab in the first-line setting compared with a strategy of reserving daratumumab until the second-line. We estimated transition probabilities from randomized trials using parametric survival modeling. Lifetime direct healthcare costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for first-line daratumumab versus second-line daratumumab from a US payer perspective. First-line daratumumab was associated with an improvement of 0.52 QALYs and 0.66 discounted life-years compared with second-line daratumumab. While both treatment strategies were associated with considerable lifetime expenditures ($1,434,937 $1,112,101 in US dollars), an incremental cost of $322,836 for first-line daratumumab led to an ICER of $618,018 per QALY. The cost of daratumumab would need to be decreased by 67% for first-line daratumumab to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY. Using daratumumab in the first-line setting for transplant-ineligible patients may not be cost-effective under current pricing. Delaying daratumumab until subsequent lines of therapy may be a reasonable strategy to limit healthcare costs without significantly compromising clinical outcomes. Mature overall survival data are necessary to more fully evaluate cost-effectiveness in this setting.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-News-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ISSN:0732-183X
1527-7755
DOI:10.1200/JCO.20.01849