Cost-Effectiveness of Zoledronic Acid Compared with Clodronate in Multiple Myeloma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the U.K. Medical Research Council Myeloma IX trial (mmix), zoledronic acid 4 mg once every 3-4 weeks, compared with clodronate 1600 mg daily, reduced the incidence of skeletal related events (sres), increased progression-free survival (pfs), and prolonged overall survival (os) in 1970 patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma. The incidence of confirmed osteonecrosis of the jaw was higher with zoledronic acid than with clodronate. The objective of the present study was to evaluate, based on the findings in mmix, the cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid compared with clodronate in patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma. METHODS: An economic model was used to project pfs, os, the incidence of sres and adverse events, and expected lifetime health care costs for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are alternatively assumed to receive zoledronic acid or clodronate. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (icer) of zoledronic acid compared with clodronate was calculated as the ratio of the difference in cost to the difference in quality-adjusted life years (qalys). Model inputs were based on results of mmix and published sources. Results were generated under different assumptions regarding the beneficial effects of zoledronic acid on os beyond 5 years after treatment initiation. RESULTS: Assuming lifetime treatment effects of zoledronic acid, treatment with zoledronic acid (compared with clodronate) increased qalys by 0.27 at an additional cost of CA$13,407, yielding an icer of CA$49,829 per qaly gained. If the threshold icer is CA$100,000 per qaly, the estimated probability that zoledronic acid is cost-effective is 80%. Assuming that the benefits of zoledronic acid on pfs and os diminish over 5 years beginning at the end of year 5, the icer is CAN$63,027 per qaly gained. If the benefits of zoledronic acid on pfs and os are assumed to persist for 5 years only, the icer is CAN$76,948 per qaly gained. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with clodronate, zoledronic acid represents a cost-effective treatment alternative in patients with multiple myeloma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".