title: Cost effectiveness of imatinib compared with interferon-alpha or hydroxycarbamide for first-line treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the cost utility of imatinib compared with interferon (IFN)-alpha or hydroxycarbamide (hydroxyurea) for first-line treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia.
  
  
  METHODS
  A cost-utility (Markov) model within the setting of the UK NHS and viewed from a health system perspective was adopted. Transition probabilities and relative risks were estimated from published literature. Costs of drug treatment, outpatient care, bone marrow biopsies, radiography, blood transfusions and inpatient care were obtained from the British National Formulary and local hospital databases. Costs (pound, year 2001-03 values) were discounted at 6%. Quality-of-life (QOL) data were obtained from the published literature and discounted at 1.5%. The main outcome measure was cost per QALY gained. Extensive one-way sensitivity analyses were performed along with probabilistic (stochastic) analysis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of imatinib, compared with IFNalpha, was pound26,180 per QALY gained (one-way sensitivity analyses ranged from pound19,449 to pound51,870) and compared with hydroxycarbamide was pound86,934 per QALY (one-way sensitivity analyses ranged from pound69,701 to pound147,095) [ pound1=$US1.691=euro1.535 as at 31 December 2002].Based on the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 50% of the ICERs for imatinib, compared with IFNalpha, fell below a threshold of approximately pound31,000 per QALY gained. Fifty percent of ICERs for imatinib, compared with hydroxycarbamide, fell below approximately pound95,000 per QALY gained.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This model suggests, given its underlying data and assumptions, that imatinib may be moderately cost effective when compared with IFNalpha but considerably less cost effective when compared with hydroxycarbamide. There are, however, many uncertainties due to the lack of long-term data.
authors.affiliation: Peninsula Technology Assessment Group, Peninsula Medical School, Exeter, England.
authors.forename: Kim
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Dalziel
authors.forename: Ali
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Round
authors.forename: Ruth
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Garside
authors.forename: Ken
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Stein
mesh_terms: D000970:Antineoplastic Agents / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D001549:Benzamides; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D006801:Humans; D006918:Hydroxyurea / Q000627:therapeutic use; D000068877:Imatinib Mesylate; D016898:Interferon-alpha / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D015464:Leukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL Positive / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000191:economics*; D008390:Markov Chains; D018803:Models, Economic; D010879:Piperazines / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D011743:Pyrimidines / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*
chemical_list: D000970:Antineoplastic Agents; D001549:Benzamides; D016898:Interferon-alpha; D010879:Piperazines; D011743:Pyrimidines; D000068877:Imatinib Mesylate; D006918:Hydroxyurea