Matching-adjusted indirect comparison and cost-effectiveness of mitoxantrone hydrochloride liposome versus Chidamide in relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma in China.
{"title":"Matching-adjusted indirect comparison and cost-effectiveness of mitoxantrone hydrochloride liposome versus Chidamide in relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma in China.","authors":"Ying Liu, Xiaoning He","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2482667","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mitoxantrone hydrochloride liposome (PLM60) is a novel liposome formulation, approved in China for the treatment of patients diagnosed with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (R/R PTCL). This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of PLM60 versus chidamide (CS055) in R/R PTCL from the Chinese healthcare perspective.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a partitioned survival model with a 5-year horizon, applying a 5% discount rate to both costs and health outcomes. Owing to the lack of head-to-head comparison between the two drugs, we employed an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to estimate relative efficacy and safety outcomes. Utility values and costs were obtained from published literature and clinical expert consultations. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the base case analysis, PLM60 saved Chinese Yuan 77,397 (226,075 vs. 303,472) and gained an additional 0.10 (1.30 vs. 1.20) quality-adjusted life years compared to CS055, making it the strongly dominant treatment option. Comprehensive sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PLM60 was estimated to be a cost-effective treatment for R/R PTCL compared with CS055 from a Chinese healthcare perspective, which provided patients with an effective and cost-saving treatment option.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2482667","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Mitoxantrone hydrochloride liposome (PLM60) is a novel liposome formulation, approved in China for the treatment of patients diagnosed with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (R/R PTCL). This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of PLM60 versus chidamide (CS055) in R/R PTCL from the Chinese healthcare perspective.
Research design and methods: We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a partitioned survival model with a 5-year horizon, applying a 5% discount rate to both costs and health outcomes. Owing to the lack of head-to-head comparison between the two drugs, we employed an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to estimate relative efficacy and safety outcomes. Utility values and costs were obtained from published literature and clinical expert consultations. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of results.
Results: In the base case analysis, PLM60 saved Chinese Yuan 77,397 (226,075 vs. 303,472) and gained an additional 0.10 (1.30 vs. 1.20) quality-adjusted life years compared to CS055, making it the strongly dominant treatment option. Comprehensive sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results.
Conclusion: PLM60 was estimated to be a cost-effective treatment for R/R PTCL compared with CS055 from a Chinese healthcare perspective, which provided patients with an effective and cost-saving treatment option.
期刊介绍:
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review.
The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections:
Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results
Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.