Belantamab Mafodotin Cost-Effective for Relapsed/Refractory MM

Study findings suggest belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) is cost-effective vs selinexor plus dexamethasone, for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have received 4 or more therapies, from a US commercial payer’s perspective (Expert Rev Hematol. 2021; 1-9. doi:10.1080/17474086.2021.1970522). 

“Patients with RRMM require several lines of therapy, with typically shorter remission duration with each additional line,” wrote Andreas Nikolaou, PhD, Modelling and Simulation, Evidera, London, UK, and colleagues.

Authors compared the cost-effectiveness of belantamab mafodotin (DREAMM-2) vs selinexor plus dexamethasone (STORM Part 2) among patients with RRMM who have received 4 or more therapies. The base case for this study used a commercial payer’s perspective over a 10-year time horizon.

Efficacy data were based on parametric survival analysis of DREAMM-2 and STORM Part 2, and matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison between DREAMM-2 and STORM Part 2.

Drug treatment, concomitant medications, adverse event management, subsequent treatments, and disease management were considered cost inputs for this study.

When compared to selinexor plus dexamethasone, belamaf decreased total treatment costs per patient by $14,267, increased patient life years by 0.74 and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and accrued 0.12 fewer progression-free life years.

“From a US commercial payer’s perspective, belamaf had lower costs, and increased QALYs and life-year gain, compared with SEL+DEX [selinexor plus dexamethasone]. Belamaf is therefore likely to be a cost-effective treatment option for patients with RRMM who have received four or more prior lines of therapy,” concluded Dr Nikolaou and colleagues.—Marta Rybczynski