Table 4.
Sensitivity scenario vs base case of $17,136 lower cost of LEN/DEX | Annual impact vs base case (favoring LEN/DEX)* |
Annual net total cost difference (favoring LEN/DEX)* |
---|---|---|
Post-progression scenario: Patients initially treated with BORT switch to LEN/DEX after relapse |
$6587 | ($10,549) |
Patient cost-sharing: 20% for office-administered therapy (BORT) and 28% for pharmacy-dispensed therapy (LEN/DEX)32 |
($7574) | ($24,709) |
Physician reimbursement rate: Change in administration reimbursement rate for BORT to ASP+10% |
($3777) | ($20,913) |
Administration of subcutaneous BORT at $72.71 per administration | $2710 | ($14,426) |
AE management: Addition of grade 2 PN for BORT (18% incidence)11 | ($354) | ($17,490) |
AE management: 28% reduction in PN through use of SC route of administration for BORT31 |
$44 | ($17,092) |
Vial wastage: 10% of BORT administrations are billed as administered rather than full-vial quantities |
$3689 | ($13,447) |
Adjusted TTP to align comparator arms: Multiply actual TTP by ratio of TTP in comparator arms |
$2902 | ($14,234) |
Numbers in parentheses indicate impact or savings in favor of LEN/DEX; numbers without parentheses indicate impact or savings in favor of BORT.
AE, adverse event; ASP, average sales price; BORT, bortezomib; DEX, dexamethasone; LEN, lenalidomide; PN, peripheral neuropathy; SC, subcutaneous.