Quantifiable? | Scenario available in the model? | Incremental costs (HUF)a | Incremental effectiveness (QALY)a | ICER (HUF/QALY)a | Impact on cost-effectiveness conclusionb | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Base case (darolutamide is cost-effective to ADT) | - | - | ref | ref | ref | - |
Time horizon of the analysis (BC: time horizon ins 27 years; ScA: time horizon is 10 years) [Type of economic analysis] | Yes | Yes | -2% | -32% | 45% | Significant |
Restriction of the efficacy analysis population to mITT (BC: censor patients who develop metastasis before starting treatment; ScA: patients who develop metastasis before starting treatment count as events) [Evaluation of the economic model—transition probabilities] | Yes | Yes | 13% | 8% | 4% | Significant |
Long-term effectiveness of darolutamide on overall survival (BC: assume benefit in mortality over the entire analysis time horizon; ScA: do not assume benefit in mortality after 10 years) [Evaluation of the economic model—transition probabilities] | Yes | Yes | < 1% | -5% | 6% | Significant |
Resource use patterns (comparator and subsequent therapies) (BC: assume equal distribution of degarelix, goserelin, leuprorelin, triptorelin and buserelin as part of ADT; ScA: differentiate the distribution of compunds used as part of ADT: higher share for degarelix, goserelin and leuprorelin, lower for triptorelin and buserelin) [Evaluation of the economic model – cost inputs] | Yes | Yes | < 1% | - | < 1% | Not significant |
Price discount on subsequent treatments (BC: use the public list prices of abiraterone-acetate, enzalutamide, degarelix; ScA: assume 30% discount on abiraterone-acetate, enzalutamide, degarelix list prices) [Evaluation of the economic model – cost inputs] | Yes | No | 7% | - | 7% | Significant |
EQ-5D value set used to estimate utilities (BC: use the UK value set when estimating utilities; ScA: use the Hungarian value set for estimating utilities) [Evaluation of the economic model – utility inputs] | No | No | - | ?↕ | ?↕ | Not quantifiable |