Economic evaluation of parathyroid hormone (PTH) in the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Sequential Treatment of Abaloparatide Followed by Alendronate Versus Teriparatide Followed by Alendronate in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis in the United States

BACKGROUND

The US Food and Drug Administration has recently approved abaloparatide (ABL) for treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) at high risk of fracture. With increasing health care spending and drug prices, it is important to quantify the value of newly available treatment options for PMO.

OBJECTIVE

To determine cost-effectiveness of ABL compared with teriparatide (TPTD) for treatment of women with PMO in the United States.

METHODS

A discrete-event simulation (DES) model was developed to assess cost-effectiveness of ABL from the US health care perspective. The model included three 18-month treatment strategies with either placebo (PBO), TPTD, or ABL, all followed by additional 5-year treatment with alendronate (ALN). High-risk patients were defined as women with PMO ⩾65 years old with a prior vertebral fracture. Baseline clinical event rates, risk reductions, and patient characteristics were based on the Abaloparatide Comparator Trial in Vertebral Endpoints (ACTIVE) trial.

RESULTS

Over a 10-year period, the DES model yielded average total discounted per-patient costs of $10 212, $46 783, and $26 837 and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of 6.742, 6.781, and 6.792 for PBO/ALN, TPTD/ALN, and ABL/ALN, respectively. Compared with TPTD/ALN, ABL/ALN accrued higher QALYs at lower cost and produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $333 266/QALY relative to PBO/ALN. In high-risk women, ABL/ALN also had more QALYs and less cost over TPTD/ALN and yielded an ICER of $188 891/QALY relative to PBO/ALN. Conclusion and Relevance: ABL is a dominant treatment strategy over TPTD. In women with PMO at high risk of fracture, ABL is an alternative cost-effective treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of teriparatide compared with alendronate and risedronate for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis patients in Iran

Background: Hip, vertebral and wrist fractures are the most common consequences of osteoporosis. This study aimed at analyzing the cost-effectiveness of teriparatide (CinnoPar®), compared with alendronate and risedronate, in the treatment of women aged 60 and over with postmenopausal osteoporosis in Iran. Methods: A decision tree model with a 2-year time horizon was used to compare treatment with teriparatide (CinnoPar®) with the following treatment strategies: two years of treatment with alendronate and two years of treatment with risedronate in women aged 60 years and over or those at risk of osteoporosis. Cost per QALY was calculated for 3 treatment strategies from the model. After base case analysis, one-way sensitivity analysis was performed on key parameters of the model to assess their impact on the study results and the cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies and the model robustness. TreeAge Pro 2006 software was used for modeling and data analysis. Results: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of alendronate and teriparatide than risedronate (base treatment) were US$- 2178.03 and US$483,783.67 per QALY, respectively. Therefore, the dominant and cost-effective treatment option was alendronate. In the one-way sensitivity analysis, the impact of annual 25% increase or decrease in the teriparatide cost on its ICER was remarkable. Also, reducing the discount rate from 0.03 to 0.0 had the greatest impact on the ICER of the teriparatide. Conclusion: The treatment strategy of teriparatide is more expensive than risedronate and alendronate and is associated with very little increase in QALYs. A significant reduction in teriparatide price and a limit in its use only for high-risk women and for acute and short-term treatment courses can contribute to its cost-effectiveness.

A systematic review of models used in cost-effectiveness analyses of preventing osteoporotic fractures

This review was aimed at the evolution of health economic models used in evaluations of clinical approaches aimed at preventing osteoporotic fractures. Models have improved, with medical continuance becoming increasingly recognized as a contributor to health and economic outcomes, as well as advancements in epidemiological data. Model-based health economic evaluation studies are increasingly used to investigate the cost-effectiveness of osteoporotic fracture preventions and treatments. The objective of this study was to carry out a systematic review of the evolution of health economic models used in the evaluation of osteoporotic fracture preventions. Electronic searches within MEDLINE and EMBASE were carried out using a predefined search strategy. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to select relevant studies. References listed of included studies were searched to identify any potential study that was not captured in our electronic search. Data on country, interventions, type of fracture prevention, evaluation perspective, type of model, time horizon, fracture sites, expressed costs, types of costs included, and effectiveness measurement were extracted. Seventy-four models were described in 104 publications, of which 69% were European. Earlier models focused mainly on hip, vertebral, and wrist fracture, but later models included multiple fracture sites (humerus, pelvis, tibia, and other fractures). Modeling techniques have evolved from simple decision trees, through deterministic Markov processes to individual patient simulation models accounting for uncertainty in multiple parameters. Treatment continuance has been increasingly taken into account in the models in the last decade. Models have evolved in their complexity and emphasis, with medical continuance becoming increasingly recognized as a contributor to health and economic outcomes. This evolution may be driven in part by the desire to capture all the important differentiating characteristics of medications under scrutiny, as well as the advancement in epidemiological data relevant to osteoporosis fractures.

Hospitalisations for fracture and associated costs between 2000 and 2009 in Ireland: a trend analysis

In Ireland, the absolute numbers of hospitalisations for all osteoporotic-type fractures including hip fractures increased between 2000 and 2009 along with the mean length of stay. The cost of hospitalisations for these fractures also increased between 2003 and 2008.

INTRODUCTION

The purposes of the study were to carry out a trend analyses of the total number of osteoporotic-type fractures in males and females aged 50 years and over in Ireland between 2000 and 2009 and to project the number of osteoporotic-type fractures in the Republic of Ireland expected by 2025.

METHODS

Age- and gender-specific trends in the absolute numbers and direct age-standardised rates of hospitalisations for all osteoporotic-type fractures in men and women ≥ 50 years were analysed, along with the associated hospitalisation costs and length of stay using the Hospital In-Patient Enquiry system database. Future projections of absolute numbers of osteoporotic-type fractures in years 2015, 2020 and 2025 were computed based on the 2009 incidence rates applied to the projected populations.

RESULTS

Between 2000 and 2009, the absolute numbers of all osteoporotic-type fractures increased by 12 % in females and by 15 % in males while the absolute numbers of hip fractures increased by 7 % in women and by 20 % in men. The age-specific rates for hip fractures decreased in all age groups with the exception of the 55-59-year age group which showed an increase of 4.1 % (p = 0.023) within the study period. The associated hospitalisation costs and length of stay increased. Assuming stable age-standardised incidence rates from 2009 over the next 20 years, the number of all types of osteoporotic-type fractures is projected to increase by 79 % and the number of hip fractures is expected to increase by 88 % by 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalisations for osteoporotic-type fractures continued to increase in Ireland. Hip fractures increased by 7 % in women and 20 % in men.

Using common random numbers in health care cost-effectiveness simulation modeling

OBJECTIVES

To identify the problem of separating statistical noise from treatment effects in health outcomes modeling and analysis. To demonstrate the implementation of one technique, common random numbers (CRNs), and to illustrate the value of CRNs to assess costs and outcomes under uncertainty.

METHODS

A microsimulation model was designed to evaluate osteoporosis treatment, estimating cost and utility measures for patient cohorts at high risk of osteoporosis-related fractures. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated using a full implementation of CRNs, a partial implementation of CRNs, and no CRNs. A modification to traditional probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was used to determine how variance reduction can impact a decision maker's view of treatment efficacy and costs.

RESULTS

The full use of CRNs provided a 93.6 percent reduction in variance compared to simulations not using the technique. The use of partial CRNs provided a 5.6 percent reduction. The PSA results using full CRNs demonstrated a substantially tighter range of cost-benefit outcomes for teriparatide usage than the cost-benefits generated without the technique.

CONCLUSIONS

CRNs provide substantial variance reduction for cost-effectiveness studies. By reducing variability not associated with the treatment being evaluated, CRNs provide a better understanding of treatment effects and risks.

The cost effectiveness of teriparatide as a first-line treatment for glucocorticoid-induced and postmenopausal osteoporosis patients in Sweden

Background

This paper presents the model and results to evaluate the use of teriparatide as a first-line treatment of severe postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) and Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP). The study’s objective was to determine if teriparatide is cost effective against oral bisphosphonates for two large and high risk cohorts.

Methods

A computer simulation model was created to model treatment, osteoporosis related fractures, and the remaining life of PMO and GIOP patients. Natural mortality and additional mortality from osteoporosis related fractures were included in the model. Costs for treatment with both teriparatide and oral bisphosphonates were included. Drug efficacy was modeled as a reduction to the relative fracture risk for subsequent osteoporosis related fractures. Patient health utilities associated with age, gender, and osteoporosis related fractures were included in the model. Patient costs and utilities were summarized and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for teriparatide versus oral bisphosphonates and teriparatide versus no treatment were estimated.

For each of the PMO and GIOP populations, two cohorts differentiated by fracture history were simulated. The first contained patients with both a historical vertebral fracture and an incident vertebral fracture. The second contained patients with only an incident vertebral fracture. The PMO cohorts simulated had an initial Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-Score of −3.0. The GIOP cohorts simulated had an initial BMD T-Score of −2.5.

Results

The ICERs for teriparatide versus bisphosphonate use for the one and two fracture PMO cohorts were €36,995 per QALY and €19,371 per QALY. The ICERs for teriparatide versus bisphosphonate use for the one and two fracture GIOP cohorts were €20,826 per QALY and €15,155 per QALY, respectively.

Conclusions

The selection of teriparatide versus oral bisphosphonates as a first-line treatment for the high risk PMO and GIOP cohorts evaluated is justified at a cost per QALY threshold of €50,000.

Patient profile in a bone health and osteoporosis prevention service in Ireland

OBJECTIVES

To (1) characterise a cohort of patients attending a major osteoporosis clinic in Ireland and (2) examine the prescribing of preventative therapies amongst these patients.

METHODS

Data were taken from 2006-2007 on patients attending the Osteoporosis Clinic at St. James's Hospital, Dublin. Information gathered included age, gender, fracture history, past medical and surgical history, co-morbidities, the results of the first DXA scans, anti-resorptive therapies along with other medications prescribed.

RESULTS

Of all patients 87.6% were female and the mean age was 68 years (SD = 14.31). In total 166 (74%) patients had osteoporosis, 40 (17.8%) had osteopenia and 18 patients (8%) had normal T-score values, 163 (72.7%) had a history of a fracture. Only 13.7% of the patients did not have a documented history of other co-morbidities.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive services such as the Osteoporosis Clinic at St. James's Hospital can provide the necessary screening, monitoring and prescribing of appropriate osteoporosis medications with additional follow-up if required to this at risk group reducing the unnecessarily traumatic effects of the disease on patients.

Profile of teriparatide in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis

One out of every 2 women within postmenopause are at risk of fracture due to osteoporosis. Fortunately, a growing arsenal of therapies is becoming available to treat this disease and prevent fracture. A new class of anabolic agents has emerged within the last decade that brought with it a new concept in osteoporosis therapy: building new stronger bone rather than simply inhibiting bone turnover. Evidence is accumulating to understand how to best utilize these new agents, and which patients benefit most. This article will review the effectiveness, risks, timing and clinical uses of teriparatide in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

The use of PTH in the treatment of osteoporosis

Anabolic drugs have recently widened therapeutic options in osteoporosis treatment, as they influence processes associated with bone formation to a greater extent and earlier than bone reabsortion. They positively affect a number of skeletal properties besides bone density, as intermittent administration of parathyroid hormone (PTH) results in an increase in the number and activity of osteoblasts leading to an increase in bone mass and improvement in skeletal architecture at both the trabecular and cortical bone. Human recombinant parathyroid hormone (hrPTH 1-84) and human recombinant PTH peptide 1-34 (teriparatide) belong to this group. The objective of this paper is to review PTH actions, benefits and adverse effects, action on biochemical markers, combination therapy with antiresorptive agents, impact of antiresorptive therapy prior to anabolic treatment, sequential treatment, and effect on glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

Cost effectiveness of teriparatide and PTH(1-84) in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis

OBJECTIVES

The purpose was to assess the cost effectiveness from a societal perspective of the recombinant human parathyroid hormones: PTH(1-34) (teriparatide) and PTH(1-84) for patients with osteoporosis with similar characteristics to patients treated in normal clinical practice in Sweden.

METHODS

A Markov model of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women was developed using 6-month cycles and a lifetime horizon. The model was populated with patients similar to the Swedish cohort of the European Forsteo Observational Study (postmenopausal women; mean age: 70 years, total hip T-score: -2.7 and 3.3 previous fractures). The cost effectiveness of both teriparatide and PTH(1-84) was estimated compared to no treatment and each other. Relative effectiveness assumptions were based on efficacy estimates from two phase III clinical trials.

RESULTS

The cost per QALY gained of teriparatide vs. no treatment was estimated at €43,473 and PTH(1-84) was estimated at €104,396. Teriparatide was indicated to be less costly and associated with more life-years and QALYs than PTH(1-84). When assuming no treatment effect on hip fractures the cost per QALY gained was €88,379. In the sensitivity analysis the cost effectiveness did not alter substantially with changes in the majority of the model parameters except for the residual effect of the treatment after stopping therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the efficacy estimates from pivotal clinical trials and characteristics of patients treated in clinical practice in Sweden, teriparatide seems to be a more cost-effective option than PTH(1-84) when compared to no treatment. The relative efficacy between the two PTH compounds was based on an indirect comparison from two separate clinical trials which has to be considered when interpreting the results.

Teriparatide: a review of its use in osteoporosis

Recombinant teriparatide (Forteo; Forsteo) is an anabolic (bone forming) agent. Studies have shown that subcutaneous teriparatide 20 microg/day is effective in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, men with idiopathic or hypogonadal osteoporosis and patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Teriparatide improves bone mineral density (BMD) and alters the levels of bone formation and resorption markers; histomorphometric studies showed teriparatide-induced effects on bone structure, strength and quality. Subcutaneous teriparatide 20 microg/day administered over a treatment period of 11-21 months was effective in reducing the risk of fractures in and in improving BMD in men with idiopathic or hypogonadal osteoporosis, women with postmenopausal osteoporosis and patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Furthermore, the beneficial effects of teriparatide on vertebral fracture prevention and BMD appear to persist following treatment cessation. Teriparatide is generally well tolerated and treatment compliance rates are favourable. However, current limitations on the length of treatment and the high acquisition cost mean that teriparatide is best reserved for the treatment of patients with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture, or for patients with osteoporosis who have unsatisfactory responses to or intolerance of other osteoporosis therapies.

Full length parathyroid hormone, PTH(1-84), for the treatment of severe osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

OBJECTIVE

To review and analyse the evidence supporting the use of full length parathyroid hormone, PTH(1-84), in the treatment of osteoporosis based on a search of several literature sources; articles selected for review were published between 1990 and 2008.

BACKGROUND

PTH(1-84) is approved for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women at high risk of fracture in Europe. It was well tolerated in clinical trials and demonstrated bone building properties and fracture prevention particularly for the lumbar spine in the treatment of postmenopausal women.

RESULTS

The TOP clinical trial showed that PTH(1-84) treatment for 18 months resulted in a 61% reduction (p = 0.001) in new vertebral fracture incidence when compared with placebo and reduced the risk of a first vertebral fracture by 68% (p = 0.006) in women without a prevalent fracture at baseline. PTH(1-84) increased bone mineral density (BMD) at vertebral and non-vertebral sites the lumbar spine BMD increasing regardless of T-score, age, prior osteoporosis therapy or number of years post-menopause. The PaTH study showed that treatment with PTH(1-84) for 12 months increased BMD at the trabecular spine and hip. Lumbar spine BMD gains were largest with sequential administration of PTH(1-84) followed by alendronate but were smaller with concurrent administration involving anabolic and antiresorptive agents. Lumbar spine BMD increases were also seen in trials involving PTH with raloxifene and PTH in combination with hormone replacement therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

PTH(1-84) has demonstrated effective bone building qualities and extends the therapeutic options available to osteoporotic women. The use of PTH(1-84) followed by sequential administration of an antiresorptive has proved effective at increasing trabecular BMD and points towards new treatment regimens offering improvements in BMD and fracture prevention.

Vertebral Fracture Assessment: the 2007 ISCD Official Positions

Vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) is an established, low radiation method for detection of prevalent vertebral fractures. Vertebral fractures are usually not recognized clinically at the time of their occurrence, but their presence indicates a substantial risk for subsequent fractures independent of bone mineral density. Significant evidence supporting VFA use for many post-menopausal women and older men has accumulated since the last ISCD Official Position Statement on VFA was published. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry considered the following issues at the 2007 Position Development Conference: (1) What are appropriate indications for Vertebral Fracture Assessment; (2) What is the most appropriate method of vertebral fracture detection with VFA; (3) What is the sensitivity and specificity for detection of vertebral fractures with this method; (4) When should additional spine imaging be performed following a VFA; and (5) What are the reporting obligations for those interpreting VFA images?

Characterization of patients in the European Forsteo Observational Study (EFOS): postmenopausal women entering teriparatide treatment in a community setting

OBJECTIVE

The European Forsteo Observational Study (EFOS) study was primarily designed to assess fracture incidence, degree of pain, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and compliance in women prescribed teriparatide in a community setting. This report describes the design of the study and characteristics of the patients at entry.

METHODS

At entry, 1645 postmenopausal women with a diagnosis of osteoporosis and about to initiate teriparatide treatment were enrolled in eight European countries. Baseline data were collected on demographic characteristics, medical and osteoporosis history, disease status, prior use of medications and HRQoL.

RESULTS

The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of patients was 71.5 (8.4) years, lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) T-score was -3.3 (1.2), the mean number of previous fractures reported after 40 years of age was 2.9 (2.0), 70% had two or more vertebral deformities and 91.7% were pre-treated with bisphosphonates. HRQoL, evaluated by the health state value (HSV) (median: 0.59, Q1; Q3: 0.08; 0.71) and visual analogue scale (VAS) (median 50.0, Q1; Q3: 35.0; 69.0) status of the European quality of life questionnaire (EQ-5D) was poor. Extreme problems were reported by 31% of patients for the pain/discomfort dimension, mobility was limited in 69% and anxiety/depression was reported by 57% of patients. Chronic or intermittent back pain was reported by 91% of patients, which occurred every day or almost every day within the last month in 66% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The post-menopausal women prescribed teriparatide were severely osteoporotic, with a high fracture risk and poor HRQoL, despite previous therapy for osteoporosis. Moderate to severe back pain was very common.

Cost-effectiveness modeling research of pharmacologic therapy to prevent osteoporosis-related fractures

Osteoporotic fractures are common among postmenopausal women and elderly men, and they cause substantial direct medical costs and loss of quality of life. The potential costs of widespread intervention strategies to reduce the incidence of fractures are also quite high. Therefore, the cost-effectiveness of such interventions is highly significant to large-scale health insurers and healthcare systems. Most modeling studies to date have examined the cost-effectiveness of pharmacologic treatment for subsets of postmenopausal women selected on the basis of bone mineral density and/or prevalent vertebral fracture. They generally suggest that oral bisphosphonates and raloxifene are cost-effective therapies for these subsets. Increasingly, modeling studies of treatments for those selected on the basis of absolute fracture risk rather than bone density criteria are being done to establish absolute fracture risk thresholds at which various treatments are cost-effective.

Effects of parathyroid hormone alone or in combination with antiresorptive therapy on bone mineral density and fracture risk--a meta-analysis

AIM

The effects of parathyroid hormone (PTH) alone or in combination with antiresorptive therapy on changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk were studied.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Randomised placebo controlled trials were retrieved from the PubMed, Web of Science or Embase databases.

RESULTS

PTH alone or in combination with antiresorptive drugs reduced vertebral [relative risk (RR)=0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.47, 2p<0.01] and non-vertebral (RR=0.62, 95% CI: 0.48-0.82, 2p<0.01) fracture risk and increased spine BMD by 6.6% (95% CI: 5.2-8.1%, 2p<0.01) and hip BMD non-significantly by 1.0% (95% CI: -0.1 to 2.1%, 2p=0.08) during 11-36 months of follow-up (13 trials). The gain in spine and hip BMD tended to increase with the length of the PTH treatment. No significant effect of study duration on fracture risk could be demonstrated. The major adverse events were hypercalcaemia, nausea and discomfort at the injection sites. Only limited data are currently available on fracture risk reduction with PTH plus antiresorptive therapies.

CONCLUSION

Although the number of studies on non-vertebral fractures is limited, our pooled analysis revealed that PTH alone or in combination with antiresorptive drugs would appear to be able to reduce the risk of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures and to increase spine and perhaps hip BMD. However, these analyses were based on cross-sectional data--i.e. based on indirect comparisons--and further studies with a direct comparison of study duration are necessary. No studies comparing PTH, PTH plus antiresorptive drugs and antiresorptive drug versus placebo in a factorial design are available; consequently, we were unable to draw any conclusions on the superiority of PTH plus antiresorptive drug versus antiresorptive drug or PTH alone with respect to BMD or fractures.

Cost-effectiveness of the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis--a review of the literature and a reference model

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the paper is to update and review the latest developments related to modelling and economic evaluation of osteoporosis in the period 2002-2005 and further to present a reference model for the assessment of the cost-effectiveness of the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

DISCUSSION

The reference model is intended to be used for fracture specific interventions affecting the risk of fracture. An interface version and an extensive description of the model is available on the internet ( http://www.healtheconomics.se ) and also accessible via the International Osteoporosis Foundation ( http://www.osteofound.org ). The purpose of the reference model is to improve the quality and comparability of cost-effectiveness analysis in the osteoporosis field and to serve as a tool for validation of present and future cost-effectiveness models. The reference model allows the cost-effectiveness analysis to be carried out from a societal perspective including intervention, morbidity and mortality costs. The model has been extensively tested and calibrated, and meets the properties of good decision analytic modelling. The model is a state transition Markov cohort model, which is characterised by a 50-year time horizon divided into one year cycle lengths. The following health states are included: "healthy", "hip fracture", "spine fracture", "wrist fracture", "other fracture", and "dead".

CONCLUSION

The model is flexible and allows for the estimation of the cost-effectiveness over different ranges for a selected number of variables (e.g., age, fracture risk, cost of intervention).