Cost-effectiveness of biological agents used in ulcerative colitis

Can we move directly from 5-ASA to a biologic agent in ulcerative colitis?

European consensus guidelines and reimbursement policies position biologic drugs for ulcerative colitis (UC) as a third-line treatment, after failure of 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) and corticosteroids/thiopurines. While 5-ASA have a very favorable safety profile, (prolonged) use of corticosteroids and thiopurines is associated with potentially serious adverse events. The therapeutic landscape of UC is rapidly evolving and selective biologic drugs with improved safety are being introduced. The first biosimilars have entered the market, leading to improved cost-effectiveness of older biologic drugs. In addition, new insights have been gained in the importance of stringent therapeutic targets such as mucosal and histological healing to improve the long-term outcome of UC patients, and in the role of therapeutic drug monitoring and treatment optimization in this regard. In this manuscript we tackle the question of whether we should move directly from 5-ASA treatment to biologic drugs to offer better and/or safer care to UC patients.

Safety Profile of Biologic Drugs in the Therapy of Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

We compared the safety profile of biologic drugs in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases through February 9, 2016. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the safety of biologic drugs (infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, and vedolizumab) with one another or with placebo in patients with UC. Two reviewers independently conducted the search and selection of studies and rated the risk of bias in each trial. The network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted for an induction phase (6-8 weeks) and maintenance phase (52-54 weeks) with a Bayesian hierarchical random effects model in Aggregate Data Drug Information System (ADDIS) software. The PROSPERO registration number was CRD42016032607.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs were included in the systematic review with NMA. In the case of the induction phase, the NMA could be conducted for the assessment of the relative safety profile of adalimumab, golimumab, and vedolizumab, and in the case of the maintenance phase of infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, and vedolizumab. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was evaluated as low risk of bias, but high risk of bias in the case of attrition bias (incomplete outcome data) according to the Cochrane criteria. No significant differences were found in the rate of adverse events in patients treated with the reviewed biologics. Vedolizumab was most likely to have the most favorable safety profile in the induction phase as was infliximab for the maintenance phase.

CONCLUSIONS

The assessment of the relative safety profile revealed no significant differences between the biologic drugs. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings including head-to-head comparisons between the analyzed biologics.

Microparticles as controlled drug delivery carrier for the treatment of ulcerative colitis: A brief review

Ulcerative colitis is the chronic relapsing multifactorial gastrointestinal inflammatory bowel disease, which is characterized by bloody or mucus diarrhea, tenesmus, bowel dystension, anemia. The annual incidence of ulcerative colitis in Asia, North America and Europe was found to be 6.3, 19.2 and 24.3 per 100,000 person-years. The major challenge in the treatment of ulcerative colitis is appropriate local targeting and drug related side-effects. To overcome these challenges, microparticulate systems seem to be a promising approach for controlled and sustained drug release after oral administration. The main goal of this article is to explore the role of microparticles in ulcerative colitis for the appropriate targeting of drugs to colon. There are different approaches which have been studied over the last decade, including prodrugs, polymeric approach, time released system, pH sensitive system, which show the site specific drug delivery to colon. Among these approaches, microparticulate drug delivery system has been gaining an immense importance for local targeting of drug to colon at a controlled and sustained rate. Combined approaches such as pH dependent and time dependent system provide the maximum release of drug into colon via oral route. This article embraces briefly about pathophysiology, challenges and polymeric approaches mainly multiparticulate systems for site specific drug delivery to colon in sustained and controlled manner so that drug related side-effects by reducing dosage frequency can be minimized.

The global burden of IBD: from 2015 to 2025

Over 1 million residents in the USA and 2.5 million in Europe are estimated to have IBD, with substantial costs for health care. These estimates do not factor in the 'real' price of IBD, which can impede career aspirations, instil social stigma and impair quality of life in patients. The majority of patients are diagnosed early in life and the incidence continues to rise; therefore, the effect of IBD on health-care systems will rise exponentially. Moreover, IBD has emerged in newly industrialized countries in Asia, South America and Middle East and has evolved into a global disease with rising prevalence in every continent. Understanding the worldwide epidemiological patterns of IBD will prepare us to manage the burden of IBD over time. The goal of this article is to establish the current epidemiology of IBD in the Western world, contrast it with the increase in IBD in newly industrialized countries and forecast the global effects of IBD in 2025.

Colorectal cancer surveillance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and primary sclerosing cholangitis: an economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

The cost-effectiveness of annual colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is uncertain. The aim of this study was to determine whether annual colonoscopy among patients with IBD-PSC is cost-effective compared with less frequent intervals from the perspective of a publicly funded health care system.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis using a Markov model was used to simulate a 35-year-old patient with a 10-year history of well-controlled IBD and a recent diagnosis of concomitant PSC. The following strategies were compared: no surveillance, colonoscopy every 5 years, biennial colonoscopy, and annual colonoscopy. Outcome measures included: costs, number of cases of dysplasia found, number of cancers found and missed, deaths, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, and the incremental cost per QALY gained.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, no surveillance was the least expensive and least effective strategy. Compared with no surveillance, the cost per QALY of surveillance every 5 years was CAD $15,021. The cost per QALY of biennial surveillance compared with surveillance every 5 years was CAD $37,522. Annual surveillance was more effective than biennial surveillance, but at an incremental cost of CAD $174,650 per QALY gained compared with biennial surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

More frequent colonoscopy screening intervals improve effectiveness (i.e., detects more cancers and prevents additional deaths), but at higher cost. Health systems must consider the opportunity costs associated with different surveillance colonoscopy intervals when deciding which strategy to implement among patients with IBD-PSC.