PD23 Economic Evaluation Of Prophylactic Immunoglobulin Versus Prophylactic Antibiotics In Hematological Malignancies: Results From The RATIONAL Feasibility Trial

Introduction Patients with hematological malignancies are at high risk of infections due to both the disease and the associated treatments. The use of immunoglobulin (Ig) to prevent infections is increasing in this population, but its cost effectiveness is unknown. This trial-based economic evaluation aimed to compare the cost effectiveness of prophylactic Ig with prophylactic antibiotics in patients with hematological malignancies. Methods The economic evaluation used individual patient data from the RATIONAL feasibility trial, which randomly assigned 63 adults with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, multiple myeloma, or lymphoma to prophylactic Ig or prophylactic antibiotics. The following two analyses were conducted to estimate the cost effectiveness of the two treatments over the 12-month trial period from the perspective of the Australian health system: (i) a cost-utility analysis (CUA) to assess the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using data collected with the EuroQol 5D-5L questionnaire; and (ii) a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to assess the incremental cost per serious infection prevented (grade ≥3) and per infection prevented (any grade). Results The total cost per patient was significantly higher in the Ig arm than in the antibiotic arm (difference AUD29,140 [USD19,000]). There were non-significant differences in health outcomes between the treatment arms: patients treated with Ig had fewer QALYs (difference −0.072) and serious infections (difference −0.26) than those given antibiotics, but more overall infections (difference 0.76). The incremental cost-effectiveness from the CUA indicated that Ig was more costly than antibiotics and associated with fewer QALYs. In the CEA, Ig costed an additional AUD111,262 (USD73,000) per serious infection prevented, but it was more costly than antibiotics and associated with more infections when all infections were included. Conclusions These results indicate that, on average, Ig prophylactic treatment may not be cost effective compared with prophylactic antibiotics for the group of patients with hematological malignancies recruited to the RATIONAL feasibility trial. Further research is needed to confirm these findings in a larger population and over the longer term.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462324002873
Primary Topic
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

PD23 Economic Evaluation Of Prophylactic Immunoglobulin Versus Prophylactic Antibiotics In Hematological Malignancies: Results From The RATIONAL Feasibility Trial

Robert Weinkove, Adam Irving, Claire Dendle, Orla Morrissey et al.
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
article

PD23 Economic Evaluation Of Prophylactic Immunoglobulin Versus Prophylactic Antibiotics In Hematological Malignancies: Results From The RATIONAL Feasibility Trial

Robert Weinkove, Adam Irving, Claire Dendle, Orla Morrissey, Neil Waters, Laura Fanning, Humphrey Pullon, Anastazia Keegan, John Reynolds, Sara Carrillo de Albornoz, Erica M. Wood, Alisa M. Higgins, Dominic Pepperell, Michael Gilbertson, Dennis Petrie, Helen Weston, Philip Crispin, Judith Trotman, Cameron Wellard, Zoe McQuilten, Tina van Tonder, Anna Johnston
article en

Abstract

Introduction Patients with hematological malignancies are at high risk of infections due to both the disease and the associated treatments. The use of immunoglobulin (Ig) to prevent infections is increasing in this population, but its cost effectiveness is unknown. This trial-based economic evaluation aimed to compare the cost effectiveness of prophylactic Ig with prophylactic antibiotics in patients with hematological malignancies. Methods The economic evaluation used individual patient data from the RATIONAL feasibility trial, which randomly assigned 63 adults with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, multiple myeloma, or lymphoma to prophylactic Ig or prophylactic antibiotics. The following two analyses were conducted to estimate the cost effectiveness of the two treatments over the 12-month trial period from the perspective of the Australian health system: (i) a cost-utility analysis (CUA) to assess the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using data collected with the EuroQol 5D-5L questionnaire; and (ii) a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to assess the incremental cost per serious infection prevented (grade ≥3) and per infection prevented (any grade). Results The total cost per patient was significantly higher in the Ig arm than in the antibiotic arm (difference AUD29,140 [USD19,000]). There were non-significant differences in health outcomes between the treatment arms: patients treated with Ig had fewer QALYs (difference −0.072) and serious infections (difference −0.26) than those given antibiotics, but more overall infections (difference 0.76). The incremental cost-effectiveness from the CUA indicated that Ig was more costly than antibiotics and associated with fewer QALYs. In the CEA, Ig costed an additional AUD111,262 (USD73,000) per serious infection prevented, but it was more costly than antibiotics and associated with more infections when all infections were included. Conclusions These results indicate that, on average, Ig prophylactic treatment may not be cost effective compared with prophylactic antibiotics for the group of patients with hematological malignancies recruited to the RATIONAL feasibility trial. Further research is needed to confirm these findings in a larger population and over the longer term.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health CareVol. 40(S1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.