Ruxolitinib for the treatment of myelofibrosis: A NICE single technology appraisal

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 31, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 841-852

  Wade, Ros ^a   Rose, Micah ^a   Neilson, Aileen Rae ^a   Stirk, Lisa ^a   Rodriguez Lopez, Rocio ^a   Bowen, David ^b   Craig, Dawn ^a   Woolacott, Nerys ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b St James's Institute of Oncology   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HYDROXYUREA; JANUS KINASE INHIBITOR; PLACEBO; RUXOLITINIB; THALIDOMIDE;

ABDOMINAL PAIN; ALLOGENEIC HEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL TRANSPLANTATION; ANEMIA; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIARRHEA; DRUG DOSE REDUCTION; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG INDICATION; DRUG MANUFACTURE; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG WITHDRAWAL; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FATIGUE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; MYELOFIBROSIS; MYELOID METAPLASIA; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PERIPHERAL EDEMA; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); POLYCYTHEMIA VERA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SKIN BRUISING; SPLEEN; SPLENECTOMY; SPLENOMEGALY; SYMPTOM; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; THROMBOCYTHEMIA; THROMBOCYTOPENIA; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNCERTAINTY;

ADULT; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; JANUS KINASES; PRIMARY MYELOFIBROSIS; PYRAZOLES; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SPLENOMEGALY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84886056764     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11792027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-013-0083-0     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the single technology appraisal (STA) process. London: NICE; 2006.
2. Craig D, et al. Ruxolitinib for the treatment of myelofibrosis. Southampton: Health Technology Assessment Programme; 2012.
3. Craig D, et al. Retigabine for the adjunctive treatment of adults with partial-onset seizures in epilepsy with and without secondary generalization. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31:101-10.
4. Kearns B, et al. Cabazitaxel for the second-line treatment of metastatic hormone refractory prostate cancer. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31:479-88.
5. Tosh J, et al. Golimumab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis after the failure of previous disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31:653-61.
6. Armstrong N, et al. Golimumab for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31:415-25.
7. Greenhalgh J, et al. Rituximab for the firstline maintenance treatment of follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31:403-13.
8. Simpson EL, et al. Bivalirudin for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31(4):269-75.
9. Rafia R, et al. Trabectedin for the treatment of advanced metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31:471-8.
10. Spackman E, et al. Trastuzumab for the treatment of HER2 positive metastatic gastric cancer. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31(3):185-94.
11. Kilonzo M, Hislop J, Elders A. Pazopanib for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31(1):15-24.
12. Sculpher M. Single technology appraisal at the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: a source of evidence and analysis for decision making internationally. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(5):347-9.
13. Dickson R, et al. Erlotinib monotherapy for the maintenance treatment of non-small cell lung cancer after previous platinum-containing chemotherapy. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29(12):1051-62.
14. Scotland G, et al. Denosumab for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in post-menopausal women. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29(11):951-61.
15. Stevenson M, Pandor A. Febuxostat for the management of hyperuricaemia in patients with gout. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29(2):133-40.
16. McKenna C, et al. Dronedarone for the treatment of atrial fibrillation. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(1):35-46.
17. Holmes M, Carroll C, Papaioannou D. Dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing elective hip or knee surgery. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(2):137-46.
18. Yang HQ, et al. Golimumab for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(4):257-70.
19. Boyers D, et al. Eltrombopag for the treatment of chronic immune or idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(6):483-95.
20. Burch J, et al. Omalizumab for the treatment of severe persistent allergic asthma in children aged 6-11 years. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(11):991-1004.
21. Whyte S, Pandor A, Stevenson M. Bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(12):1119-32.
22. Bagust A, et al. Cetuximab for recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck/A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(6):439-48.
23. Rodgers M, et al. Alitretinoin for severe chronic hand eczema. A NICE Single Technology Appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(5):351-62.
24. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Myelofibrosis (splenomegaly, symptoms) - ruxolitinib [ID510]. 2013 (cited 2013 February). http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TA/Wave0/615.
25. Girodon F, et al. Significant increase in the apparent incidence of essential thrombocythemia related to new WHO diagnostic criteria: a population-based study. Haematologica. 2009;94(6):865-9.
26. McNally RJ, et al. Age and sex distributions of hematological malignancies in the U.K. Hematol Oncol. 1997;15(4):173-89.
27. Phekoo KJ, et al. The incidence and outcome of myeloid malignancies in 2,112 adult patients in southeast England. Haematologica. 2006;91(10):1400-4.
28. Orphanet. Prevalence of rare diseases: bibliographic data, Paris; 2012. p. 30.
29. European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products. In: Public summary of opinion on orphan designation. (R)-3-(4-(7H-pyrrolo[2,3-d]pyrimidin-4-yl)-1H-pyrazol-1-yl)-3- cyclopentylpropanenitrile phosphate for the treatment of myelofibrosis secondary to polycythaemia vera or essential thrombocythaemia. London: European Medicines Agency; 2011. p. 5.
30. Novartis. Single Technology Appraisal (STA): Ruxolitinib (Jakavi) for the treatment of primary myelofibrosis, post-polycythaemia vera myelofibrosis and post-essential thrombocythaemia myelofibrosis. Manufacturer's submission. 2012. p. 294.
31. Harrison C, et al. JAK inhibition with ruxolitinib versus best available therapy for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(9):787-98.
32. Verstovsek S, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(9):799-807.
33. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Final scope for the proposed appraisal of ruxolitinib for the treatment of myelofibrosis. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2012.
34. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). CHMP assessment report: Jakavi Ruxolitinib. EMA/465846/2012. 2012 (cited 2012). http://www.emea.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/EPAR-Public-assessment- report/human/002464/WC500133226.pdf.
35. Verstovsek S, et al. Safety and efficacy of INCB018424, a JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor, in myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(12):1117-27.
36. Harrison CN, et al. Results of a randomized study of the JAK inhibitor ruxolitinib (INC424) versus best available therapy (BAT) in primary myelofibrosis (PMF), post-polycythemia vera-myelofibrosis (PPV-MF) or post-essential thrombocythemia-myelofibrosis (PET-MF). J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(18 Suppl. 1):LBA6501.
37. Verstovsek S, et al. Long-term outcome of Ruxolitinib treatment in patients with Myelofibrosis: durable reductions in spleen volume, improvements in quality of life, and overall survival advantage in COMFORT-I. Abstract Number 800, in 54th ASH Annual Meeting, Atlanta, 2012.
38. Cervantes F., et al. Long-term safety, efficacy, and survival findings from COMFORT-II, a phase 3 study comparing ruxolitinib with best available therapy (BAT) for the treatment of myelofibrosis (MF). Abstract Number 801, in 54th ASH Annual Meeting, Atlanta, 2012.
39. Verstovsek S, et al. A phase I/II study of INCB018424, an oral, selective JAK inhibitor, in patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF) and post polycythemia vera/essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis (Post-PV/ET MF). J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(15):7004.
40. Cervantes F, et al. New prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis based on a study of the International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment. Blood. 2009;113(13):2895-901.
41. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Eribulin for the treatment of advanced metastatic breast cancer (TA250). London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2012. p. 67.
42. Roskell NS, et al. Using a condition-specific measure of patient-reported outcomes to derive utilities in myelofibrosis. In: ISPOR 17th annual international meeting, Washington, DC, 2012.
43. Roskell NS, et al. Using a condition-specific measure of patient-reported outcomes to derive utilities in myelofibrosis. Value Health. 2012;15(4):A224-5.
44. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE; 2008. p. 76.
45. Tefferi A, et al. International Working Group (IWG) consensus criteria for treatment response in myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia, for the IWG for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment (IWG-MRT). Blood. 2006;108(5):1497-503.
46. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Ruxolitinib for disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adults with myelofibrosis. Appraisal consultation document (ACD). 2013 (cited 2013 April 29). http://guidance.nice. org.uk/TA/Wave0/615/Consultation/DraftGuidance.
47. Verstovsek S, et al. The MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) experience with ruxolitinib, an oral JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor, in myelofibrosis: long-term follow-up outcomes of 107 patients from a phase I/II study. Blood. 2011;118(21):1646.
48. Tefferi A, Pardanani A. Serious adverse events during ruxolitinib treatment discontinuation in patients with myelofibrosis. Mayo Clin Proc. 2011;86(12):1188-91.
49. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Final appraisal determination: Ruxolitinib for disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adults with myelofibrosis. 2013 (cited 2013 April 29). http://www.nice.org.uk/ nicemedia/live/13687/63722/63722.pdf.