Cost Effectiveness and Budget Impact of Siponimod Compared to Interferon Beta-1a in the Treatment of Adult Patients with Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis with Active Disease in Switzerland

Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, autoimmune, and inflammatory disease. The economic burden of MS is substantial, and the high cost of Disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) prices are the main drivers of healthcare expenditures. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of DMDs for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

MATERIALS AND METHOD

Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase. The search covered articles published between May 2001 and May 2023. Studies that were written in English and Persian and examined the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of DMDs in patients with MS were included in our review. Data extraction was guided by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist, and the quality of economic evaluations was assessed using the Quality of Health Economics Studies Instrument (QHES). All costs were converted to 2020 U.S. dollars using Purchasing Power Parity (PPP).

RESULTS

The search yielded 1589 studies, and 49 studies were eligible for inclusion. The studies were mainly based on a European setting. Most studies employed Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness. The lowest and highest numerical value of outcome measures were -1,623,918 and 2,297,141.53, respectively. Furthermore, the lowest and highest numerical value of the cost of DMDs of RRMS were $180.67, and $1474840.19, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of all studies, it can be concluded that for the treatment of patients with MS, care-oriented strategies should be preferred to drug strategies. Also, among the drug strategies with different prescribing methods, oral disease-modifying drugs of RRMS should be preferred to injectable drugs and intravenous infusions.

The Benefits and Risks of Switching from Fingolimod to Siponimod for the Treatment of Relapsing-Remitting and Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease that affects the central nervous system (CNS). Currently, MS treatment is limited to several Food and Drug Administration (FDA)- and European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved medications that slow disease progression by immunomodulatory action. Fingolimod and siponimod have similar mechanisms of action, and consequently, their therapeutic effects may be comparable. However, while fingolimod is mainly used for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), siponimod, according to EMA label, is recommended for active secondary progressive MS (SPMS). Clinicians and scientists are analysing whether patients can switch from fingolimod to siponimod and identifying the advantages or disadvantages of such a switch from a therapeutic point of view. In this review, we aim to discuss the therapeutic effects of these two drugs and the advantages/disadvantages of switching treatment from fingolimod to siponimod in patients with the most common forms of MS, RRMS and SPMS.

Real-world annualized relapse rates from contemporary multiple sclerosis clinics in the UK: a retrospective multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Annualized relapse rate (ARR) is used as an outcome measure in multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials. Previous studies demonstrated that ARR has reduced in placebo groups between 1990 and 2012. This study aimed to estimate real-world ARRs from contemporary MS clinics in the UK, in order to improve the feasibility estimations for clinical trials and facilitate MS service planning.

METHODS

A multicentre observational, retrospective study of patients with MS from 5 tertiary neuroscience centres in the UK. We included all adult patients with a diagnosis of MS that had a relapse between 01/04/2020 and 30/06/2020.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen out of 8783 patients had a relapse during the 3-month study period. Seventy-nine percent of the patients with a relapse were female, the mean age was 39 years, and the median disease duration was 4.5 years; 36% of the patients that had a relapse were on disease-modifying treatment. The ARR from all study sites was estimated at 0.05. The ARR for relapsing remitting MS (RRMS) was estimated at 0.08, while the ARR for secondary progressive MS (SPMS) was 0.01.

CONCLUSIONS

We report a lower ARR compared to previously reported rates in MS.

To wait, or too late? Modeling the effects of delayed ofatumumab treatment in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Several disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) reduce relapse rates and slow disease progression. RRMS DMTs have varying efficacy and administration routes; DMTs prescribed first may not be the most effective on relapses or disease progression. Here, we aimed to quantify the benefit of initiating ofatumumab, a high-efficacy DMT, earlier in the treatment pathway.

METHODS

Aggregate data from a real-world cohort of patients with RRMS, who were eligible for dimethyl fumarate (DMF) or ofatumumab treatment within the UK National Health Service (N = 615), were used to produce a simulated patient cohort. The cohort was tracked through a discrete event simulation (DES) model, based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), with a lifetime time horizon. Outcomes assessed were: mean number of relapses, time to wheelchair (EDSS ≥7), and time to death. Two modeling approaches were used. The first compared outcomes between two treatment sequences (base case: ofatumumab to natalizumab versus DMF to ofatumumab). The second incorporated a time-specific delay of 1-5 years for switching from DMF to ofatumumab; the difference in outcomes as a function of increasing delay to ofatumumab are reported.

RESULTS

Compared with delayed ofatumumab, fewer relapses and increased time to wheelchair were predicted for earlier ofatumumab in the treatment-sequence approach (mean relapses over the lifetime time horizon: 8.63 versus 9.00; time to wheelchair: 17.55 versus 16.60 years). Time to death was similar for both sequences. At Year 10, a numerically greater proportion of patients receiving earlier ofatumumab had mild disease (EDSS 0-3: 44.12% versus 40.06%). Greater differences, reflecting poorer outcomes, were predicted for relapses and time to wheelchair with increasing delays to ofatumumab treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The DES model provided a means by which the magnitude of benefit associated with earlier ofatumumab initiation could be quantified; fewer relapses and a prolonged time to wheelchair were predicted.

Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab as an adjuvant treatment for patients with resected stage IIB or IIC melanoma in Switzerland

AIM

To assess the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus observation for patients with resected stage IIB/IIC melanoma from a third-party payers' perspective in Switzerland over a lifetime horizon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Markov state transition model with four health states (recurrence-free [RF], locoregional recurrence, distant metastases [DM], and death) was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus observation as an adjuvant treatment in patients with stage IIB/IIC melanoma who have undergone complete resection. The model utilized data from the KEYNOTE-716 randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03553836). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (Swiss Franc [CHF] per life year or quality-adjusted life years [QALYs] gained) was calculated. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and deterministic sensitivity analysis were conducted to assess the robustness of the base case results.

RESULTS

Model results demonstrated that pembrolizumab is highly cost-effective as an adjuvant treatment for resected stage IIB/IIC melanoma versus observation in Switzerland. Base case results showed an ICER of CHF 27,424/QALY (EUR 27,342/QALY; exchange rate: 1 CHF = 0.997 EUR) for pembrolizumab versus observation. Results were most sensitive to changes to transition probabilities from the RF state. Most sensitivity and scenario analyses resulted in ICERs below the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of CHF 100,000. At this WTP, pembrolizumab had a 78.9% probability of being cost-effective versus observation.

LIMITATIONS

Due to a limited follow-up period in the KEYNOTE-716 trial, data from other clinical trials in the advanced melanoma setting were synthesized in a network meta-analysis and used to inform transition probabilities from DM to death in the cost-effectiveness model, to overcome the absence of these data from the trial.

CONCLUSION

The model demonstrated that pembrolizumab is highly cost-effective versus observation in patients with resected stage IIB/IIC melanoma in Switzerland. The ICER was below the WTP threshold of CHF 100,000, commonly used for cost-effectiveness models in Switzerland.

Clinical Evaluation of Siponimod for the Treatment of Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: Pathophysiology, Efficacy, Safety, Patient Acceptability and Adherence

INTRODUCTION

A number of disease-modifying therapies have been approved for use in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) in the past two decades. However, only few treatment options are available for patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). Siponimod has recently been approved for use in patients with active forms of SPMS (who experience clinical relapses or new lesions on MRI superimposed on secondary progression independent of relapse activity).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive review on the mechanism of action, efficacy, safety, cost effectiveness and patient adherence with siponimod.

METHODS

We performed a PubMed search using the search terms: "siponimod", "secondary progressive multiple sclerosis", "sphingosine 1-phosphate modulators". Titles and abstract were screened and selected for relevance to the key section of this article.

FINDINGS

Siponimod is an oral sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor (S1PR) modulator with selectivity to S1PR-1 and 5. Modulation of this receptor on lymphocytes causes its internalization and degradation, preventing their egress from lymphoid tissues to the blood. In the pivotal Phase 3 randomized controlled trial EXPAND, siponimod was superior to placebo in reducing the risk of disability progression confirmed at 3 and 6 months, as well as the development of new MRI lesions and the rate of brain volume loss. Secondary analysis also showed a benefit on measures of cognitive functioning. The risk of lymphopenia and first-dose bradycardia appears to be lower with siponimod compared to non-selective S1P1R modulators. Different CYP2C9 genotypes affect the metabolism of siponimod; hence, genetic testing is required to adapt the titration and final dose accordingly.

CONCLUSION

Long-term extension and real-world studies will allow further evaluation of efficacy and safety in this population. Future research should focus on better defining SPMS, and identifying biomarkers of progression and outcome measures of treatment response in this category of patients.

Stick or twist? Cost-effectiveness of siponimod compared with continuing existing disease-modifying therapies in the treatment of active secondary progressive multiple sclerosis in the UK

OBJECTIVE

Identification of the phenotypic transition from relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) is often delayed due to disease complexity and an unwillingness to withdraw RRMS disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), driven by limited SPMS treatment options. Despite the paucity of clinical evidence for efficacy in patients with SPMS, DMTs licensed for RRMS are frequently continued into the early stages of SPMS. The cost-effectiveness of oral siponimod, an active SPMS DMT, versus continued oral or infused RRMS DMTs for patients with active SPMS, was evaluated.

METHODS

A cohort Markov model based on disease progression through Expanded Disability Status Scale health states, with annual cycles and lifetime horizon, was employed to determine the cost-effectiveness of siponimod from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective for patients with active SPMS. Baseline characteristics, health state utility values, hazard ratios for time to 6-month confirmed disability progression, annualized relapse rate ratios and adverse events for siponimod were obtained from the phase 3 EXPAND clinical trial, supplemented by published literature. Published costs, resource use data and comparator efficacy data were obtained from the literature and, in the absence of data, reasonable assumptions were made.

RESULTS

Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were greater for siponimod versus all comparators (3.45 versus 2.69-2.83). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), calculated as cost per QALY, for siponimod versus natalizumab (dominant), ocrelizumab (£4,760), fingolimod (£10,033) and dimethyl fumarate (£15,837) indicated that siponimod was cost-effective at the commonly accepted willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognition of active SPMS and treatment of this phenotype with siponimod offers a cost-effective and clinically beneficial treatment approach compared with the continuation of oral or infused RRMS DMTs.