The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of imatinib in chronic myeloid leukaemia: a systematic review

Abstract

Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per monograph and for the rest of the world £3 per monograph.You can order HTA monographs from our Despatch Agents:-fax (with credit card or official purchase order) -post (with credit card or official purchase order or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you either to pay securely by credit card or to print out your order and then post or fax it. Contact Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to Direct Mail Works Ltd and drawn on a bank with a UK address. Paying by credit cardThe following cards are accepted by phone, fax, post or via the website ordering pages: Delta, Eurocard, Mastercard, Solo, Switch and Visa. We advise against sending credit card details in a plain email. Paying by official purchase orderYou can post or fax these, but they must be from public bodies (i.e. NHS or universities) within the UK. We cannot at present accept purchase orders from commercial companies or from outside the UK. How do I get a copy of HTA on CD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd.htm). Or contact Direct Mail Works (see contact details above) by email, post, fax or phone. HTA on CD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA Programme and lists the membership of the various committees. HTAThe effectiveness and costeffectiveness of imatinib in chronic myeloid leukaemia: a systematic review R Garside NHS R&D HTA ProgrammeT he NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme was set up in 1993 to ensure that high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.The research reported in this monograph was commissioned by the HTA Programme on behalf of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Technology assessment reports are completed in a limited time to inform the appraisal and guidance development processes managed by NICE. The review brings together evidence on key aspects of the use of the technology concerned. However, appraisals and guidance produced by NICE are informed by a wide range of sources.The research reported in this monograph was funded as project number 01/26/01.The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the HTA Programme, NICE or the Department of Health. The editors wish to emphasise that funding and publication of this research by the NHS should not be taken as implicit support for any recommendations made by the authors. Criteria for inclusion in the HTA monograph seriesReports are published in the HTA monograph series if (1) they have resulted from work commissioned for the HTA Programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the referees and editors.Reviews in Hea...

Dasatinib and nilotinib for imatinib-resistant or -intolerant chronic myeloid leukaemia: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

“…241 As there has been little research on the treatment of CML with IFN since 2002, we believe that this review appropriately summarises the evidence base without the need to be updated. In the review, 24 studies of treatment with IFN in CML-CP were identified.…”

Two different point mutations in ABL gene ATP-binding domain conferring primary imatinib resistance in a chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patient: A case report

“…Patients usually resist the chemotherapy like hydroxyurea and interferon-á (24). In recent years, Gleevec has fascinated the physicians, clinicians, patients and researchers by its high effectiveness against BCRABL positive CML patients (25). As it stops the oncogenic activity of bcr-abl onco-protein by binding to its ATP-binding site in kinase domain, it has fewer side effects than interferon and is thus well-tolerated (26).…”

How should cost-effectiveness analysis be used in health technology coverage decisions? Evidence from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence approach

“…In this case, the economic analysis suggested favourable results for a treatment option that was seen as clinically less desirable by some Committee members and/or expert clinical advisors. 24 Although Imatinib was shown to be cost-effective when compared with Interferon-a (IntronA & Viraferon, Schering-Plough, Hertfordshire, UK; Roferon-A, Roche, Hertfordshire, UK), it was markedly less so when compared to Hydroxyurea (HU) (Bristol-Myers Squibb, Middlesex, UK). This led some Committee members to question the grounds for an appraisal determination recommending routine use of Imatinib.…”