Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate for older osteoporotic women in Japan

Economic evaluation of four treatment strategies for postmenopausal patients with osteoporosis and a recent fracture in mainland China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Postmenopausal patients with osteoporosis who have a recent fracture are at very high risk of fracture, and this study finds that stratified treatment based on fracture risk would be a cost-effective treatment option for this population.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four anti-osteoporosis medications (denosumab, zoledronate, teriparatide, and alendronate) for postmenopausal osteoporotic women in mainland China, using a stratified treatment strategy recommended by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American College of Endocrinology (AACE/ACE).

METHODS

A microsimulation Markov model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of the four treatments in postmenopausal osteoporotic patients of different ages (65, 70, 75, and 80 years), with a recent fracture from the Chinese healthcare perspective. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), which represent the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) obtained. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to assess the robustness of model findings.

RESULTS

Alendronate was dominated by denosumab-to-alendronate and zoledronate at all ages examined, indicating that the costs of the two drugs were lower, but QALYs was greater. However, teriparatide-to-alendronate yielded an ICER of $76,432.07/ QALY, compared with alendronate at age 65, which exceeded the pre-determined willingness-to-pay threshold of $37,653/ QALY. The results were similar at other ages. The DSA showed that the most sensitive parameters were drug efficacy for vertebral and wrist fractures, the relative risk of vertebral fractures, and the persistence of the drugs. The PSA showed that zoledronate had a 100% probability of being the most cost-effective treatment, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $37,653/ QALY.

CONCLUSION

Stratified treatment based on very high fracture risk is more cost-effective than conventional pills in mainland China. Among the stratified treatments, zoledronate is the optimal option.

Cost Effectiveness of Denosumab for Secondary Prevention of Osteoporotic Fractures Among Postmenopausal Women in China: An Individual-Level Simulation Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of denosumab versus alendronate for secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures among post-menopausal women in China.

METHODS

A validated individual-level simulation model of osteoporotic fractures in the Chinese setting was adapted. Allowing both treatment discontinuation and waning effects, the analysis aimed to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of denosumab compared to alendronate by simulating a cohort of previously fractured individuals over the residual lifetime from the healthcare system perspective. Hip, vertebral, and wrist/humeral fractures were tracked along with the associated medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years. Age-related health state utility values, health state utility values of fractures, costs, fracture incidence, and mortality risks for Chinese were used whenever available. Comparative effectiveness data were obtained from a published network meta-analysis. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

In the base case, denosumab was dominated by alendronate with incremental costs of CN¥2743 (US$425) and incremental health outcomes of - 0.20 quality-adjusted life-years at its current price in mainland China. It remained dominated in all one-way sensitivity analysis robustness checks. However, denosumab was cost effective if both drugs did not carry any waning effects. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, denosumab remained dominated in all replications.

CONCLUSIONS

Denosumab is not cost effective for preventing secondary fractures among overall postmenopausal women in China. It is advisable to identify alternative denosumab regimens for high-risk subgroups among previously fractured postmenopausal women.

A systematic review of cost‑effectiveness analyses of sequential treatment for osteoporosis

Sequential treatment of osteoporosis has been increasingly mentioned in recent years. However, the corresponding systematic review has not been reported. This study aims to systematically review and assess all full-text pharmacoeconomic studies of sequential treatment for osteoporosis. A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid), CNKI, and Wanfang Database to identify original articles, published before June 17, 2022. The quality of included articles was evaluated by the updated Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS 2022) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases International Osteoporosis Foundation (ESCEO-IOF). In general, ten articles were included in this review. For the comparison between sequential treatment and bisphosphonate monotherapy, more than 75% of studies demonstrated the sequential treatment was cost-effective or dominant, with the exception of sequential treatment involving teriparatide. When the comparisons occurred between the two sequential treatment groups, the sequential treatments associated with either abaloparatide or romosozumab were cost-effective or dominant compared to the sequential treatment involving teriparatide. Several major key drivers of cost-effectiveness included drug cost, medication persistence and adherence, drug effect on fracture risk, offset effect, time horizon, and baseline fracture risk. The most of studies were identified as high quality in CHEERS (2022) and ESCEO-IOF. The cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment for osteoporosis is influenced by multiple factors. Generally, the sequential treatments involving abaloparatide, romosozumab, denosumab, and bisphosphonates may be considered as the preferred option for osteoporosis with high fracture risk, while the sequential treatment with teriparatide was not a cost-effectiveness strategy. The ESCEO-IOF and CHEER (2022) increase the transparency, comparability, extrapolation, and quality of research, engage patients and the general public in research on health services and policies, and help improve the quality of health technology assessment.

Effects of alendronate combined with local radiotherapy on serum Akt/GSK3β and bone metabolism levels in patients with bone metastases from primary liver cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of alendronate combined with local radiotherapy on the level of serum Akt/GSK3β and bone metabolism in patients of primary liver cancer with bone metastases.

METHODS

Clinical data of 68 patients of primary liver cancer with bone metastases and treated in Shanghai General Hospital, a hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, were retrospectively analyzed. According to the different surgical methods, the patients were divided into a control group, with 33 cases treated with local radiotherapy plus Oxycodone hydrochloride extended-release tablets, and a study group, with 35 cases treated with alendronate combined with local radiotherapy. The remission rate and adverse reaction rate were compared between the two groups. In addition, we observed and compared the liver function indexes (total bilirubin (TBIL), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP)), serum Akt/GSK3β level, bone metabolism levels (bone alkaline phosphatase (BAP) and levels of osteocalcin (OST)), α-fetoprotein (AFP), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), osteopontin (OPN), matrix metallopeptidase 9 (MMP-9), and quality of life of the patients in two groups before and after treatment.

RESULTS

A higher remission rate was observed in the study group (94.29%) than that in the control group (75.76%) (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the adverse reaction rate between the study group (20.00%) and the control group (12.12%) (P>0.05). In both groups, the post-treatment serum levels of TBIL, ALT, ALP, Akt, GSK3β, AFP, VEGF, OPN, MMP-9, hardship and nausea due to cancer were all decreased, while serum levels of BAP and OST, and psychological, physical and social functions were all increased (all P<0.05). The improvement of the above indicators in the study group were better than those in the control group (all P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The use of alendronate combined with local radiotherapy received good response in patients of primary liver cancer with bone metastasis. In addition, their liver function, bone metabolism levels and quality of life all improved without increasing adverse reactions. The underlying mechanism may be related to the regulation of Akt and GSK3β levels.

Cost-effectiveness analyses of denosumab for osteoporosis: a systematic review

This paper systematically reviewed and assessed all retrievable pharmacoeconomic studies on denosumab for the treatment of osteoporosis. Denosumab was more cost-effective in patients with older age, prior fracture experience, lower BMD T-scores, and more risk factors. ESCEO-IOF guidelines were more applicable to improve the quality of pharmacoeconomic studies in osteoporosis.

INTRODUCTION

There are many pharmacoeconomic studies on denosumab for osteoporosis. However, the corresponding reviews are outdated or incomplete and need to be updated and refined. This article aims to systematically review and evaluate all retrievable pharmacoeconomic studies of denosumab for osteoporosis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed utilizing PubMed, EMBASE(Ovid), Proquest(EconLit), Chongqing VIP, WanFang Database, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure to identify full-text articles published before September 2021. The quality of full-text articles was evaluated by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards(CHEERS) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases International Osteoporosis Foundation guideline(ESCEO-IOF).

RESULTS

In total, 21 full-text articles were eligible for inclusion. Denosumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis was not dominant compared to zoledronate and teriparatide. However, denosumab was dominant compared with strontium ranelate, raloxifene, and ibandronate in patients over 65 years. The probabilities of denosumab being cost-effective or dominant were more than 85% compared with no treatment and risedronate in patients aged over 70 years. Compared to alendronate, the highest rate of denosumab dominance occurred in patients aged 65 to 75 years, at about 65%. Most of the articles had higher CHEERS scores than ESCEO-IOF scores (converted into percentages).

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the treatment of osteoporosis was influenced by multiple factors. Generally, denosumab was more cost-effective in patients with older age, prior fracture experience, lower BMD T-scores, and more risk factors. ESCEO-IOF guidelines were more applicable to improve the transparency, generalization, and quality of pharmacoeconomic studies in osteoporosis.

Medical expenditures for fragility hip fracture in Japan: a study using the nationwide health insurance claims database

Using the nationwide health insurance claims database in Japan, we estimated total annual medical expenditures for fragility hip fracture across the population at 329.2 billion yen (2.99 billion US dollars). Long-term care expenditures were not included. Fragility hip fracture imposes a considerable health economic burden on society in Japan.

PURPOSE

Fragility hip fracture imposes a substantial health economic burden on society globally. We aimed to estimate medical expenditures for fragility hip fracture using the nationwide health insurance claims database in Japan.

METHODS

We included adults aged 60 and over without prior hip fracture who were admitted for fragility hip fracture (i.e., femoral neck or extracapsular) between October 2014 and October 2015 (13 months). Fragility hip fracture was identified through newly assigned disease codes for fracture and procedure codes associated with the fracture. As a proxy for medical expenditures per patient, incremental payments were calculated (i.e., the difference between the total payments 6 months before and after fragility hip fracture). The total payments included health insurance reimbursements and copayments for inpatient and outpatient services. Long-term care expenditures were not included in this study.

RESULTS

We identified 142,361 individuals (28,868 male and 113,493 female) with fragility hip fracture. Mean medical expenditures for fragility hip fracture per patient were 2,550,000 yen (¥) (23,180 US dollars [$]; ¥110 = $1) in male and ¥2,494,000 ($22,670) in female patients, respectively. Total annual medical expenditures for fragility hip fracture across the population were 329.2 billion yen (2.99 billion US dollars): 67.96 billion yen (620 million US dollars) in male and 261.24 billion yen (2.37 billion US dollars) in female patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to estimate medical expenditures for hip fracture using the nationwide health insurance claims database, which represents almost all health insurance claims in Japan. Fragility hip fracture inflicts a considerable health economic burden on society in Japan.

Management of patients at very high risk of osteoporotic fractures through sequential treatments

Osteoporosis care has evolved markedly over the last 50 years, such that there are now an established clinical definition, validated methods of fracture risk assessment and a range of effective pharmacological agents. Currently, bone-forming (anabolic) agents, in many countries, are used in those patients who have continued to lose bone mineral density (BMD), patients with multiple subsequent fractures or those who have fractured despite treatment with antiresorptive agents. However, head-to-head data suggest that anabolic agents have greater rapidity and efficacy for fracture risk reduction than do antiresorptive therapies. The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) convened an expert working group to discuss the tools available to identify patients at high risk of fracture, review the evidence for the use of anabolic agents as the initial intervention in patients at highest risk of fracture and consider the sequence of therapy following their use. This position paper sets out the findings of the group and the consequent recommendations. The key conclusion is that the current evidence base supports an "anabolic first" approach in patients found to be at very high risk of fracture, followed by maintenance therapy using an antiresorptive agent, and with the subsequent need for antiosteoporosis therapy addressed over a lifetime horizon.

Cost-Effectiveness of Sequential Denosumab/Zoledronic Acid Compared With Zoledronic Acid Monotherapy for Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Women in China

Objective: The primary purpose of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of sequential denosumab/zoledronic acid versus zoledronic acid monotherapy for postmenopausal osteoporotic women in China.

Methods: We updated and utilized a previously validated Markov microsimulation model to obtain the cost-effectiveness of two strategies for treating postmenopausal osteoporotic women. We compared the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) (US dollars [$] per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) of sequential denosumab/zoledronic acid (i.e., biannual subcutaneous denosumab for 3 years followed by annual intravenous zoledronic acid for 3 years) with zoledronic acid monotherapy for 3 years in Chinese women with postmenopausal osteoporosis at ages 65, 70, 75, and 80 from the health care payer perspective. Our study’s willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set to three times the value of China’s per capita GDP in 2020 ($31,512).

Results: The ICERs of sequential denosumab/zoledronic acid versus zoledronic acid monotherapy were $59,389/QALY, $23,821/QALY, $22,710/QALY, and $14,027/QALY at age 65, 70, 75, and 80 years, respectively. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the most impactful parameter was the persistence rate of the medications. If the persistence rate of denosumab or zoledronic acid was increased by 10%, sequential denosumab/zoledronic acid would be cost-effective at age 65. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probabilities of sequential denosumab/zoledronic being cost-effective compared to zoledronic acid monotherapy were approximately 29.3%, 68.7%, 86.1%, and 99.4% for ages 65, 70, 75, and 80 years, respectively, at the WTP threshold of $31,512/QALY.

Conclusion: Among Chinese postmenopausal osteoporosis women over 70 years old, sequential denosumab/zoledronic acid was cost-effective compared with zoledronic acid monotherapy at the pre-determined WTP threshold.

Cost-Effectiveness of Sequential Teriparatide/Zoledronic Acid Compared With Zoledronic Acid Monotherapy for Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Women in China

Objective

We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of sequential teriparatide/zoledronic acid relative to zoledronic acid monotherapy for postmenopausal osteoporotic women in China.

Methods

A previously validated Markov microsimulation model was updated to examine the cost-effectiveness of daily subcutaneous teriparatide for 2 years followed by annual intravenous zoledronic acid for 3 years (sequential teriparatide/zoledronic acid), compared with zoledronic acid monotherapy for 3 years in Chinese women with postmenopausal osteoporosis at ages 65, 70, 75, and 80 from the health care payer perspective.

Results

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) (US dollars [$] per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) of sequential teriparatide/zoledronic acid vs. zoledronic acid monotherapy was $173,223/QALY at age 65 years, which was much higher than the pre-determined willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $ 31,512/QALY, and the results were similar at other ages. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the two most impactful parameters were the cost of teriparatide and the residual effects of the medications included in this study. Sequential teriparatide/zoledronic acid became cost-effective at age 80 with the cost of teriparatide reduced by 50%. Without the residual effect, the ICER increased to $257,982/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses shown that the probabilities of zoledronic acid monotherapy being cost-effective were 100% at a WTP of $31,512/QALY.

Conclusions

Among Chinese women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, sequential teriparatide/zoledronic acid was not cost-effective unless the cost of teriparatide was reduced by 50% only for the participants over 80 years.

Zoledronic acid inhibits osteoclastogenesis and bone resorptive function by suppressing RANKL‑mediated NF‑κB and JNK and their downstream signalling pathways

Targeting excessive osteoclast differentiation and activity is considered a valid therapeutic approach for osteoporosis. Zoledronic acid (ZOL) plays a pivotal role in regulating bone mineral density. However, the exact molecular mechanisms responsible for the inhibitory effects of ZOL on receptor activator of nuclear factor (NF)-κB ligand (RANKL)-induced osteoclast formation are not entirely clear. The present study aimed to investigate the role of ZOL in osteoclast differentiation and function, and to determine whether NF-κB and mitogen-activated protein kinase, and their downstream signalling pathways, are involved in this process. RAW264.7 cells were cultured with RANKL for differentiation into osteoclasts, in either the presence or absence of ZOL. Osteoclast formation was observed by tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase staining and bone resorption pit assays using dentine slices. The expression of osteoclast-specific molecules was analysed using reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction and western blotting assays to deduce the molecular mechanisms underlying the role of ZOL in osteoclastogenesis. The results showed that ZOL significantly attenuated osteoclastogenesis and bone resorptive capacity in vitro. ZOL also suppressed the activation of NF-κB and the phosphorylation of c-Jun N-terminal kinase. Furthermore, it inhibited the expression of the downstream factors c-Jun, c-Fos and nuclear factor of activated T cells c1, thereby decreasing the expression of dendritic cell-specific transmembrane protein and other osteoclast-specific markers. In conclusion, ZOL may have therapeutic potential for osteoporosis.

Which injected antiosteoporotic medication is worth paying for? A cost-effectiveness analysis of teriparatide, zoledronate, ibandronate, and denosumab for postmenopausal osteoporotic women in China

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four injected antiosteoporotic medications including teriparatide, zoledronate, ibandronate, and denosumab for postmenopausal osteoporotic women in China.

METHODS

A Markov microsimulation model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of the four drugs above in Chinese postmenopausal osteoporotic women with no fracture history of hip, vertebral, or wrist at various ages (65, 70, 75, and 80) of therapy initiation from the health care payer perspective.

RESULTS

Denosumab was dominant (ie, lower costs and greater quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) compared with other strategies at all ages studied. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of zoledronate or ibandronate versus no treatment were $4,482.88/ QALYs or $11,378/QALYs, respectively, at age 65 years, and the results at other ages were similar. In contrast, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of teriparatide strategy compared with no treatment exceeded the pre-determined threshold of a willingness-to-pay of $31,512/QALY regardless of the adoption of the patient assistance program at all ages studied, and a threshold analysis showed that teriparatide without patient assistance program became cost-effective when the annual drug cost is decreased to $1,644.87 (current cost: $8,764.65). The cost-effectiveness decision did not change in most of the one-way sensitivity analyses. A scenario analysis considering no offset effect of denosumab showed that zoledronate had the potential to become the optimal option relative to denosumab. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probabilities of denosumab being cost-effective compared with other strategies were 100% at a willingness-to-pay of $31,512/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Among postmenopausal osteoporotic women in China, denosumab therapy is cost-effective at all ages examined from the health care payer perspective, compared with teriparatide, zoledronate, or ibandronate. This study will help clinicians and policymakers make better decisions about the relative economic value of osteoporosis treatments in China.