Skip to main content
Log in

Cost-Utility Analysis of Melphalan plus Prednisone With or Without Interferon-α2b in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Results from a Randomised Controlled Trial

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

This study evaluated the cost utility of adding interferon-α2b to conventional treatment in patients with multiple myeloma. It also provides a methodology for transforming complex quality-of-life profiles into a single index value on the conventional 0 to 1 quality-adjusted life-year scale (QALY).

From 1990 to 1992,583 patients with newly diagnosed, symptomatic multiple myeloma were enrolled in a randomised, multicentre, phase III study to evaluate the addition of interferon-α2b to treatment with melphalan and prednisone.

Addition of interferon-α2b yielded a 12% increase in median survival time, at the expense of a slight reduction in quality of life during the first year of treatment. The gain in survival time was not large enough to reach statistical significance. Patients receiving interferon-α2b also had a 5- to 6-month prolongation of the plateau phase.

Cost per QALY gained by adding interferon-α2b was conservatively estimated at $US110 000. Potentially better cost effectiveness may be found in different treatment regimens or in certain patient subgroups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kyle RA, Bayrd ED. The monoclonal gammopathies: multiple myeloma and related cell disorders. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  2. Turesson I, Zettervalll O, Cuzick J, et al. Comparison of trends in the incidence of multiple myeloma in Malm0, Sweden and other countries. N Engl J Med 1984; 310: 421–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wisløff F, Andersen P, Andersson TR, et al. Has the incidence of multiple myeloma in old age been underestimated? Eur J Haematol 1991; 47: 333–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gregory WM, Richards MA, Malpas JS. Combination chemotherapy versus melphalan and prednisolone in the treatment of multiple myeloma: an overview of published trials. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 334–42

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Alexanian R, Dimopoulos M. The treatment of multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 1994; 330: 484–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Oken MM. Standard treatment of multiple myeloma. Mayo Clin Proc 1994; 69: 781–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hjorth M, Westin J, Dahl IMS, et al. Interferon-alpha 2B added to melphalan-prednisone for initial and maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma. Ann Intern Med 1996; 124: 212–22

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality of life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 365–76

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. The Norwegian Ministry of Health. The DRG system: price list for 1996. Oslo: Mimeo, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  10. Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH, van Ineveld BM, et al. The friction cost method for measuring indirect costs of disease. J Health Econ 1995; 14: 171–89

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gold MR, Siegel FE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wisløff F, Eika S, Hippe E, et al. Measurement of health related quality of life in multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol 1996; 92: 604–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. The EuroQol Group. EuroQol — a new facility for the measurement of health related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Nord E, Richardson J, Macarounas-Kirchmann K. Social evaluation of health care vs personal valuation of health states. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1993; 9: 463–78

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Elvik R. The validity of using health state indexes in measuring the consequences of traffic injury for public health. Soc Sci Med 1995; 40: 1385–98

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Sintonen H. The 15-D measure of health related quality of life. Working paper 42. Melbourne: Centre for Health Program Evaluation, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  17. Nord E. Health index models for use in resource allocation decisions: a critical review in the light of observed preferences for social choice. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996; 12: 31–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Williams A. The measurement and valuation of health: a chronicle. Discussion paper 136. York: Centre for Health Economics, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  19. Rosser R, Cottee M, Rabin R, et al. Index of health-related quality of life. In: Hopkins A, editor. Measures of quality of life, and the uses to which they may be put. London: Royal College of Physicians of London, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sintonen H, Pekurinen M. A fifteen-dimensional measure of health related quality of life (15D) and its applications. In Walker SR, Rosser RM, editors. Quality of life assessment: key issues in the 1990s. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hurley S. A review of cost-effectiveness analyses. Med J Aust 1990; 153 Supp.: S20–3

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gerard K. Cost-utility in practice: a policy makers guide to the state of the art. Health Policy 1992; 21: 249–79

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Nord E. The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health care. Health Policy 1993; 24: 227–38

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Teeling Smith G. The economics of hypertension and stroke. Am Heart J 1990; 119: 725–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life-years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1989; 5: 559–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Smith TJ, Hillner BE, Desch CE. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of cancer treatment: rational allocation of resources based on decision analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 18: 1460–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nord E. Towards quality assurance in QALY calculations. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1993; 9: 37–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Tsevat J, Cook EF, Green ML, et al. Health values of the seriously ill. Ann Intern Med 1994; 122: 514–20

    Google Scholar 

  29. Browman GP, Bergsagel D, Sicheri, et al. Randomized trial of interferon mainentance in multiple myeloma: a study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2354–60

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ludwig H, Cohen AM, Pollack A, et al. Interferon-alpha for induction and maintenance in multiple myeloma: results of two multicenter randomized trials and summary of other studies. Ann Oncol 1995; 5: 467–76

    Google Scholar 

  31. Wisløff F, Hjort M, Kaasa S, et al. Effect of interferon on the health-related quality of life of multiple myeloma patients: results of a Nordic randomized trial comparing melphalanprednisone to melphalan-prednisone alpha-interferon. Br J Haematol 1996; 94: 324–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nord, E., Wisøff, F., Hjorth, M. et al. Cost-Utility Analysis of Melphalan plus Prednisone With or Without Interferon-α2b in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma. Pharmacoeconomics 12, 89–103 (1997). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199712010-00009

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199712010-00009

Keywords

Navigation