Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Vedolizumab Compared with Other Biologics in Anti-TNF-Naïve Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis in Japan

Infliximab Pricing in International Economic Evaluations in Inflammatory Bowel Disease to Inform Biologic and Biosimilar Access Policies: A Systematic Review

Background. Policies mandating the use of lower cost biosimilars in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have created concerns for patients who prefer their original biologic. Purpose. To inform the cost-effectiveness of biosimilar infliximab treatment in IBD by systematically reviewing the effect of infliximab price variation on cost-effectiveness for jurisdictional decision making. Data Sources. MEDLINE, Embase, Healthstar, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, Mental Measurements Yearbook citation databases, PEDE, CEA registry, HTA agencies. Study Selection. Economic evaluations of infliximab for adult or pediatric Crohn's disease and/or ulcerative colitis published from 1998 through 2019 in which drug price was varied in sensitivity analysis were included. Data Extraction. Study characteristics, main findings, and results of drug price sensitivity analyses were extracted. Studies were critically appraised. The cost-effective price of infliximab was determined based on the stated willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds for each jurisdiction. Data Synthesis. Infliximab price was examined in sensitivity analysis in 31 studies. Infliximab showed favorable cost-effectiveness at a price ranging from CAD $66 to $1,260 per vial, depending on jurisdiction. A total of 18 studies (58%) demonstrated cost-effectiveness ratios above the jurisdictional WTP threshold. Limitations. Drug prices were not always reported separately, WTP thresholds varied, and funding sources were not consistently reported. Conclusion. Despite the high cost of infliximab, few economic evaluations examined price variation, limiting the ability to infer the effects of biosimilar introduction. Alternative pricing strategies and access to treatment could be considered to enable IBD patients to maintain access to their current medications.

Highlights

In an effort to reduce public drug expenditures, Canadian and other jurisdictional drug plans have mandated the use of lower cost, but similarly effective, biosimilars in patients with newly diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease or require a nonmedical switch for established patients. This switch has created concerns for patients and clinicians who want to maintain the ability to make treatment decisions and remain with the original biologic.It is customary for economic evaluations to assess the robustness of results to variations in high-cost items such as medications. In the absence of economic evaluations of biosimilars, examining biologic drug price in sensitivity analysis provides insight into the cost-effectiveness of biosimilar alternatives. A total of 31 economic evaluations of infliximab for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease varied the infliximab price in sensitivity analysis.The infliximab price deemed to be cost-effective within each study ranged from CAD $66 to CAD $1,260 per 100-mg vial. A total of 18 studies (58%) demonstrated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio above the jurisdictional willingness-to-pay threshold. If policy decisions are based on price, then originator manufacturers could consider reducing the price or negotiating alternative pricing models to enable patients with inflammatory bowel disease to remain on their current medications.

Vedolizumab subcutaneous formulation maintenance therapy for patients with IBD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The application of vedolizumab (VDZ) subcutaneous (SC) formulation has brought more convenience and hope to patients with moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) in the coronavirus disease 2019 context.

Objective

This study aimed to systematically evaluate all previous studies that used VDZ SC formulation for maintenance therapy in patients with IBD.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data Sources and Methods

The search was conducted using the subject and free terms related to 'Vedolizumab', 'Subcutaneous', and 'IBD', in Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and at ClinicalTrials.gov databases between 2008 and 2022. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. The endpoints included efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity.

Results

A total of 60 studies and 2 completed clinical registry trials were retrieved, of which 3 RCTs with high methodological quality, and 3 cohort studies with large heterogeneity were included in the meta-analysis. In the RCT study design, patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) under different conditions after treated with VDZ SC were significantly distinct than those for placebo (PBO) in clinical remission, endoscopic remission, and biochemical remission. In Crohn's disease (CD), the aforementioned parameters were slightly higher than those for PBO, but there was not statistically significant in endoscopic remission and the efficacy of anti-tumor necrosis factor-naive patients. The clinical remission, endoscopic remission, and biochemical remission in patients with UC after VDZ SC treatment were similar to those after intravenous (IV) treatment. The risk ratios in patients experiencing adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs after VDZ SC and PBO treatments were 86% and 89% in UC, and 96% and 80% in CD, respectively. Compared with IV, safety was not statistically different. The risk of developing anti-VDZ antibody after VDZ SC treatment was only 20% of that after PBO in patients with UC, but it was 9.38 times in CD.

Conclusion

VDZ SC treatment maintained the clinical efficacy of IV induction in patients with IBD without increasing the safety risk, and the efficacy was more pronounced in patients with UC. Immunogenicity might be a potential factor for the decrease in efficacy rate in patients with IBD.

Registration

INPLASY 2022120115.

The potential mechanism of Bletilla striata in the treatment of ulcerative colitis determined through network pharmacology, molecular docking, and in vivo experimental verification

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic nonspecific intestinal inflammatory disease, which belongs to a subtype of inflammatory bowel disease, but still lacks effective drug treatment. Bletilla striata (B. striata) is one of the most valuable traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs) in China, can stop bleeding, can promote wound healing, and can regulate immunity. Based on data mining, B. striata was found to be a common TCM for the treatment of UC, but the exact therapeutic mechanism is not yet known. This study aims to explore the potential mechanisms of B. striata in the treatment of UC using network pharmacology, molecular docking techniques, and in vivo experimental research. We extracted the active ingredients and targets of B. striata from the Traditional Chinese Medicine Systems Pharmacology (TCMSP) database and analysis platform. We retrieved and screened the corresponding UC-related target genes in multiple databases. Subsequently, we constructed an herb-ingredient-target-disease-network, generated a protein-protein interaction network, performed Gene Ontology enrichment analysis, and performed Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway analysis to identify potential treatment mechanisms. After screening for key active ingredients and target genes, we performed molecular docking using AutoDock Vina software to select the best binding target for molecular docking and validate the binding activity. The UC model was established in mice, and the results of network pharmacology and molecular docking were verified by in vivo experiments. In all, 5 compounds were obtained from the TCMSP database, and 74 UC-related pathogenic genes were obtained from GeneCards, DisGeNET, OMIM, TTD, and DrugBank. After KEGG enrichment analysis, pathways in cancer, the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT signalling pathway, and metabolic pathways were identified as the top three signalling pathways associated with UC treatment. The results of molecular docking showed that the active components of B. striata have good binding activities to the pivotal targets epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and PIK3CA. In a dextran sulphate sodium-induced colitis model, we found that B. striata can alleviate the symptoms of UC, decrease the secretion of the inflammatory cytokines interleukin-6 and tumour necrosis factor-α, and downregulate the expression levels of EGFR, PIK3CA, and p-AKT. In conclusion, the treatment of UC with B. striata may alleviate the inflammatory response of the colon, and B. striata mainly inhibits the EGFR/PI3K/AKT signalling pathways.

Cost Effectiveness of Tofacitinib for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Active Ulcerative Colitis in Colombia

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of tofacitinib versus other treatment options currently available in Colombia in naïve to biologics (first-line) and exposed to biologics (second-line) patients with moderate to severe active ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed with 8-week cycles, simulating a cohort of patients in a 5-year time horizon. The health states included remission, treatment response, active UC, and colectomy. The transition probabilities for the induction and maintenance phase were obtained from a network meta-analysis, and effectiveness was measured using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Unit costs were derived from official national sources.

RESULTS

For first line, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY was $883 for tofacitinib and $3619 for infliximab, compared with adalimumab. Sensitivity analysis showed that tofacitinib is cost effective in 45% of the iterations, adalimumab in 5%, and infliximab in 50%. Meanwhile, the ICER of adalimumab was $14,927 compared with tofacitinib in second-line treatment. In the sensitivity analysis, tofacitinib was cost effective in 64% of the iterations, followed by adalimumab in 36%. Infliximab and golimumab were not included due to data limitations in the network meta-analysis of second-line treatment.

CONCLUSION

The analysis suggests that in Colombia, treatment with tofacitinib for patients with moderate-to-severe UC is a cost-effective option in both lines compared with other treatment options.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of dupilumab among patients with oral corticosteroid-dependent uncontrolled severe asthma in Japan

Background: Asthma is a common, chronic inflammatory airway disorder, with up to 1,177,000 people receiving asthma treatment in Japan. Dupilumab is a first-in-class, monoclonal antibody for the treatment of atopic diseases, including persistent asthma. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of dupilumab, compared with other biologics, as add-on treatment to background therapy in patients aged ≥12 years with uncontrolled, persistent asthma in Japan.Methods: A life-time Markov cohort model was used to conduct cost-effectiveness analysis from the Japanese healthcare payer perspective with an annual discount rate of 2%. Dupilumab was compared with benralizumab and mepolizumab, and against omalizumab (as a hypothetical scenario). Inputs were informed by dupilumab clinical trials (VENTURE [NCT02528214] and QUEST [NCT02414854] trials), the literature, official Japanese sources and expert opinions.Results: The base case results suggest that treatment with dupilumab leads to fewer severe exacerbations and increased life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) than benralizumab and mepolizumab. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000 per QALY gained, dupilumab was the dominant strategy (lower cost, increased QALYs) versus benralizumab, and cost-effective versus mepolizumab with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ¥1,010,921 (US$9,190, US$1=¥110). Versus omalizumab, dupilumab was not cost-effective (ICER of ¥10,802,368 [US$98,203]).Conclusions: In Japan, dupilumab, as an add-on to background therapy, is economically dominant compared with benralizumab, and cost-effective versus mepolizumab.

Cost-effectiveness of intravenous vedolizumab vs subcutaneous adalimumab for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of intravenous (IV) vedolizumab vs subcutaneous (SC) adalimumab for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) was assessed in the VARSITY clinical trial, which demonstrated for the first time in a head-to-head clinical trial setting the superiority of IV vedolizumab with respect to clinical remission and endoscopic improvement. Both therapies offer better clinical outcomes compared with immunomodulators and corticosteroids but are often more expensive than other pharmacologic treatment options. Thus, payers and decision makers face the task of leveraging finite resources for optimal health benefits, which can be aided by the use of cost-effectiveness models. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of IV vedolizumab vs SC adalimumab from a US payer perspective using head-to-head data from the VARSITY trial. METHODS: A cohort decision tree was developed to estimate the costs and clinical outcomes associated with IV vedolizumab vs SC adalimumab to treat adults with moderately to severely active UC. Simulated cohorts began the model at treatment induction and continued to maintenance treatment with vedolizumab or adalimumab unless experiencing nonresponse or serious adverse drug reaction (ADR), in which case those patients transitioned to second-line treatment with tofacitinib, infliximab, or golimumab, where they could achieve response and/or remission or not. Those who still did not achieve response or remission or who had a serious ADR transitioned to a state of nonresponse for the remainder of the model or received surgery. The process was modeled for patients who were treatment naive and treatment experienced at baseline separately. Efficacy and safety inputs for vedolizumab and adalimumab were taken from the VARSITY trial, and corresponding inputs for other biologics were derived from a network meta-analysis. All clinical inputs were extrapolated over 2 years. Direct medical costs (expressed in 2019 US dollars) included those related to drug acquisition and administration, ADRs, routine monitoring, and additional treatment procedures. Outcomes were not discounted given the short time horizon. Univariate sensitivity and scenario analysis were applied to evaluate the robustness of the model to underlying parameter and structural uncertainty. RESULTS: Initial treatment with vedolizumab was associated with a higher remission rate at 2 years (73.5% vs 71.5%) and higher persistence (22.0% vs 14.4%) compared with adalimumab. Total direct medical costs were lower for the vedolizumab cohort ($100,022 vs $151,133), primarily driven by the lower annual drug acquisition cost of vedolizumab ($85,953 vs $137,492). When endoscopic improvement was used as the outcome measure, IV vedolizumab was also associated with higher endoscopic remission and lower overall costs. CONCLUSIONS: With better clinical outcomes and lower direct medical costs over a 2-year model horizon, vedolizumab IV was the dominant treatment strategy vs adalimumab SC in adults with moderately to severely active UC. Outcomes were driven primarily by the probability of major ADRs and induction response. DISCLOSURES: This study was supported by Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. (Lexington, MA). Schultz and Turpin are employees of Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. Turpin has stock or stock options in Takeda Pharmaceuticals. Diakite, Carter, and Snedecor are employees of OPEN Health (Bethesda, MD), which received payment from Takeda for the design and execution of this study. This study was presented at the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (ECCO) 2020 Congress and Digestive Disease Week (DDW), 2020 Virtual Congress.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Vedolizumab Compared With Infliximab in Anti-TNF-α-Naïve Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis in China

Objective: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of vedolizumab vs. infliximab in the treatment of anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α)-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe active ulcerative colitis (UC) in China. Methods: The costs and effectiveness of vedolizumab and infliximab in the treatment of anti-TNF-α naïve patients with moderate-to-severe active UC were compared using a hybrid decision tree model and a Markov model. From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, this study simulated the lifetime health benefits [quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and costs (USD) for patients with UC from the induction phase to the maintenance phase, with an annual discount rate of 5%. The clinical efficacy and transition probability data were based on a previously published network meta-analysis. The health utility, surgical risk, biologic drug discontinuation rate, and mortality were derived from previous literature and the Chinese statistical yearbook. The cost data were based on China's drug purchase and biding platform and the results of a survey sent to clinicians in 18 tertiary hospitals. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) were performed to validate the robustness of the models' assumptions and specific parameter estimates. Results: The results of the base-case analyses showed that compared with infliximab, vedolizumab led to a gain of 0.25 QALYs (9.56 vs. 9.31 QALYs) and was less expensive by $7,349 ($180,138 vs. 187,487), indicating that the use of vedolizumab was a dominant strategy. The results of one-way sensitivity analyses suggested that the annual discount rate and health-state costs had the greatest impact, but the results were otherwise consistent with those of the base-case analyses. The PSAs suggested that vedolizumab had a 98.6% probability of being effective at a threshold of 3 times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in China in 2020. Conclusion: Compared with infliximab, vedolizumab appears to be a more cost-effective option in the treatment of anti-TNF-α naïve adult patients with moderate-to-severe, active UC in China.

Vedolizumab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: evolving paradigms

Inflammatory bowel diseases, comprising Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are chronic, relapsing and remitting immune-mediated inflammatory diseases affecting the gastrointestinal tract. Vedolizumab is the first licensed drug in a group of 'gut-selective' biological agents used to treat inflammatory bowel diseases. The GEMINI registrational trials established the efficacy of vedolizumab for the induction and maintenance of remission in both CD and UC, with the most favourable results in tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-antagonist-naive patients. In recent years, a wealth of 'real-world' data has emerged supporting positive clinical, endoscopic and histological outcomes in patients treated with vedolizumab (VDZ) as well as reassuring safety data. More recently, the results of the first head-to-head trials of VDZ and TNF antagonists have been reported, as well as the results of a number of studies exploring the role of therapeutic drug monitoring with VDZ. This review brings together data reported on VDZ to date, including from the GEMINI trials, real-world data and emerging studies regarding therapeutic drug monitoring and immunogenicity. The safety profile of VDZ is also reviewed. Evolving treatment paradigms are explored, including data regarding the role of VDZ in perianal CD, post-operative complications and recurrence, extraintestinal manifestations and pregnancy.