Cost-effectiveness of early initiation of fingolimod versus delayed initiation after 1 year of intramuscular interferon beta-1a in patients with multiple sclerosis

Safety and Efficacy of Fingolimod in Iranian Patients with Relapsing-remitting Multiple Sclerosis

Introduction:

Fingolimod is the first confirmed oral immune-modulator to treat Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS). This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of fingolimod therapy in Iranian patients with RRMS.

Methods:

In our trial, 50 patients resistant to conventional interferon therapy were assigned to receive fingolimod 0.5 mg per day for 12 months. The number of Dadolinium (Gd)-enhanced lesions, enlarged T2 lesions, and relapses over 12 months were considered as endpoints and compared to baseline. Liver biochemical evaluations and lymphocyte count were done at baseline and in months 3, 6, and 12 of the study. Patients were also monitored for possible cardiovascular events within the first 24 h and other side effects routinely.

Results:

Among the patients who completed the trial, the number of Gd-enhanced and enlarged T2 lesions over 12 months significantly decreased (P=0.03 and P<0.001, respectively). The proportion of relapse-free patients was higher compared to the onset of fingolimod administration. There were no significant alterations in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores. A slight, transient increase was recorded in liver enzymes among the participants. Lymphocyte count reduced by 61% at month 1 and displayed a gradual increase until month 12. No bradycardia and macular edema were recorded.

Conclusion:

These findings indicate an effective first-line fingolimod therapy for the first time in Iranian patients with RRMS. The decrease in the number of new attacks and the amelioration of MRI lesions were the benefits of fingolimod therapy, suggesting that it is preferred to other medicines to treat RRMS in Iran.

How have Economic Evaluations in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis Evolved Over Time? A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) over the last two decades has prompted the economic assessments of these treatments by reimbursement authorities. The aim of this systematic literature review was to evaluate the modeling approach and data sources used in economic evaluations of DMTs for RMS, identify differences and similarities, and explore how economic evaluation models have evolved over time.

METHODS

MEDLINE®, Embase®, and EBM Reviews databases were searched using Ovid® Platform from database inception on 25 December 2019 and subsequently updated on 17 February 2021. In addition, health technology assessment agency websites, key conference proceedings, and gray literature from relevant websites were screened. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Drummond and Philips checklists.

RESULTS

A total 155 publications and 30 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) reports were included. Most of these were cost-utility analysis (73 studies and 25 HTA reports) and funded by medicines manufacturers (n = 65). The top three countries where studies were conducted were the USA (n = 29), the UK (n = 16), and Spain (n = 10). Studies predominantly used Markov cohort models (94 studies; 25 HTAs) structured based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) with 21 health states (20 studies; 12 HTA reports). The London Ontario and British Columbia data sets were commonly used sources for natural history data (n = 33; n = 13). Twelve studies and ten HTAs from the UK assumed a waning of DMT effect over the long term, while this was uncommon in studies from other countries. Nineteen studies adjusted for multiple sclerosis (MS)-specific mortality estimates, while 18 studies used data from the national life table without adjustment. Studies prominently referred to mortality data that were about two decades old. The data on treatment effect was generally obtained from randomized controlled trials (43 studies; 7 HTAs) or from published evidence synthesis (23 studies; 24 HTAs). Utility estimates were derived from either published studies and/or supplemented with data from RCTs. Most of the models used the lifetime horizon (n = 37) with a 1-year cycle length (n = 63).

CONCLUSION

As expected, similarities as well as differences were observed across the different economic models. Available evidence suggests models should continue using the Markov cohort model with 21 EDSS-based states, however, allowing the transition to a lower EDSS state and assuming a sustained treatment effect. With reference to the data sources, models should consider using a contemporary MS-specific mortality data, recent natural history data, and country-specific utility data if available. In case of data unavailability, a sensitivity analysis using multiple sources of data should be conducted. In addition, future models should incorporate other clinically relevant outcomes, such as the cognition, vision, and psychological aspects of RMS, to be able to present the comprehensive value of DMTs.

Incorporating patients' preferences in the value assessment of disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis: a narrative review

Introduction: Despite the increasing role of patients in the US healthcare system, patients have yet been engaged in the value assessment of their treatments, including disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS). The objectives of this review were therefore to summarize existing studies on cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and patients' preferences of DMTs for MS, and to discuss how to incorporate patients' preferences into the value assessment of DMTs.Area covered: We reviewed previous systematic reviews and conducted further search until November 2020 for studies on CEA with QALYs and patients' preferences of DMTs for MS. We identified the outcomes that were assessed or valued in the CEA studies and the DMT attributes that were important to patients with MS.Expert opinion: Our literature review showed that the studies using CEA with QALYs failed to capture some important DMT attributes, e.g., route and frequency of administration, identified in the studies on the patients' preferences. Various approaches were available for incorporating the patients' preferences in the value assessment of DMTs for MS. We supported this incorporation, which subsequently would increase patient access to preferred DMTs.

Switching to fingolimod in PREFERMS: Effect of treatment history and naïvety on clinical, MRI and treatment satisfaction outcomes✰

BACKGROUND

Injectable disease-modifying therapies (iDMTs) are often used as first-line treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis. Fingolimod is frequently used following treatment with iDMTs. Whether prior iDMT treatment impacts the effectiveness of subsequent fingolimod therapy is unclear. Here, we assessed switching from iDMTs to fingolimod, and the impact of treatment history on fingolimod escalation using data from the 12-month 'Prospective, Randomized, active-controlled, open-label study to Evaluate patient retention on Fingolimod versus approved first-line disease-modifying thErapies in adults with Relapsing-remitting Multiple Sclerosis' (PREFERMS). The study design and results at the end of randomized treatment (EoRT) in PREFERMS have been published.

METHODS

Both treatment-naïve patients and those who had previously received an iDMT were eligible for enrolment in PREFERMS, and one treatment switch was permitted on study. Pre-specified exploratory analyses compared outcomes in those randomized to fingolimod or to an iDMT at end of study (EoS), which included time spent on randomized and on switch treatment. Post hoc exploratory analyses (unadjusted for multiplicity owing to the large number of comparisons) among patients randomized to an iDMT who switched to fingolimod, compared outcomes longitudinally before (EoRT) and after (EoS) switching, and compared outcomes at EoRT and EoS among subgroups stratified by iDMT-treatment history. Outcomes included brain volume, various measures of gadolinium-enhancing [Gd+] lesion counts, annualized relapse rate (ARR), Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) score, patient-reported treatment satisfaction using the Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) and adverse event (AE) rates.

RESULTS

At EoS, 255 of 439 patients randomized to an iDMT had switched to fingolimod and 27 of 436 patients randomized to fingolimod had switched to an iDMT. By EoS, 44.2% of total treatment exposure in the iDMT group was to fingolimod and the mean time spent on fingolimod in this group was 220 days (approximately 7 months). Outcomes in the fingolimod group at EoS (brain volume, changes in Gd+ lesion counts, ARR, oral SDMT score and MSQ score) were similar to those seen at EoRT, but in the iDMT group these outcomes were more favorable at EoS than at EoRT and were similar to rates seen in the fingolimod group. Among patients who switched from iDMT to fingolimod, there were longitudinal improvements in ARR (EoRT, 0.3 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.2-0.4]; EoS, 0.2 [0.1-0.3]; odds ratio, 0.5 [0.3-0.9]) and in treatment satisfaction (proportion of patients with MSQ > 5; EoRT, 67.4%; EoS, 90.4%; odds ratio, 5.7 [95% CI, 3.4-9.4]) after fingolimod treatment, and changes in brain volume, Gd+ lesion count, and AEs or AEs causing discontinuation were also more favorable at EoS than at EoRT. In all patient groups stratified by iDMT-treatment history, differences in outcomes narrowed or disappeared after fingolimod treatment.

CONCLUSION

These analyses indicate that patients in PREFERMS had improved outcomes within months of switching to fingolimod from an iDMT and that improvements occurred irrespective of the number of iDMTs previously administered. These data provide a unique opportunity to explore clinical, radiological and safety outcomes associated with a range of clinically relevant treatment pathways.

The clinical and cost impact of switching to fingolimod versus other first line injectable disease-modifying therapies in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on the effectiveness and healthcare costs of switching to fingolimod versus another first line injectable therapy (FLIT) in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) who have already been treated with FLIT.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of the study were to assess the annualized relapse rate (ARR), socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, persistence and adherence rates, healthcare resource utilization and cost among patients with RMS who either switch to fingolimod or another FLIT in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

A multicenter, observational, retrospective chart review was conducted across eight clinics in Canada between 1 May 2011 and 30 June 2013. The data was collected from two cohorts: patients who switched to fingolimod and patients who switched to FLIT from a previous FLIT.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

A total of 124 patients were included in the study: 82 and 42 switched to fingolimod and FLIT, respectively. There were no significant differences in the patient characteristics at the date of switch except for number of previous disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) which was higher in the fingolimod cohort (fingolimod: 1.52; FLIT: 1.10, p < .001). The ARR during the first year of switching was numerically higher in the FLIT cohort compared to the fingolimod cohort (FLIT: 0.9 [95% CI 0.3-1.6]; fingolimod: 0.3 [95% CI 0.1-0.5]). The negative binomial model adjusted for the number of previous DMTs confirmed a statistically significant difference in ARR between the fingolimod and FLIT cohorts at 12 months of follow-up (p = .012). In the fingolimod cohort, 20.7% of patients experienced at least one relapse compared to 38.1% in the FLIT cohort. In both groups, a high proportion of patients (>90%) showed good treatment adherence (≥80% of prescribed doses).

Disease-Modifying Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting and Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

Several disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) treat relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) and primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS). Few comprehensive cost-effectiveness analyses exist in this area, particularly from a payer perspective, despite rapidly increasing prices of DMTs.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically compare cost effectiveness of all relevant DMTs for first-line treatment of RRMS, second-line treatment of RRMS, and first-line treatment of PPMS.

METHODS

We used a Markov model with health states based on Expanded Disability Status Score categories. Upon discontinuing first-line treatment, RRMS patients continued to second-line therapy then to supportive care, and PPMS patients moved directly to supportive care. Data was sourced from clinical trials and commercially and publicly available sources. The target population was treatment-naïve adults with RRMS or PPMS. We used a lifetime horizon from a US payer perspective, and compared DMTs for RRMS (first-line: dimethyl fumarate, glatiramer acetate, interferon β-1a, interferon β-1b, peginterferon β-1a, teriflunomide, natalizumab, fingolimod, and ocrelizumab; second-line: alemtuzumab, natalizumab, fingolimod, and ocrelizumab), ocrelizumab for PPMS, and supportive care. Outcome measures included total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS

For RRMS first-line therapy, ocrelizumab dominated the other DMTs with an ICER of US$166,338/QALY compared with supportive care. For RRMS second-line therapy, alemtuzumab dominated the other three DMTs, providing more QALYs for lower costs. For PPMS, ocrelizumab had an ICER of US$648,799/QALY compared with supportive care. Wide variability in results was observed in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results were sensitive to the relative risk of progression and cost of DMTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Ocrelizumab would likely be cost effective as a first-line treatment for RRMS with a discounted price but was not cost effective for PPMS. Alemtuzumab dominated other options for second-line treatment of RRMS. Other DMTs were generally similar in terms of costs and health outcomes, providing health benefits compared to supportive care but with significant added costs. If drug prices were lowered, more DMTs could be cost effective.

Modeling Approaches in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Disease-Modifying Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: An Updated Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Economic Evaluations

BACKGROUND

Numerous cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) have been published in the last three decades. Literature reviews of the modeling methods and results from these CEAs have also been published. The last literature review that focused on modeling methods, without country or time horizon in the inclusion criteria, included studies published up to 2012. Since then, new DMTs have become available, and new models and data sources have been used to assess their cost effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to provide a detailed and comprehensive description of the relevant aspects of economic models used in CEAs of DMTs for RRMS, to understand how these models have progressed from recommendations provided in past reviews, what new approaches have been developed, what issues remain, and how they could be addressed.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the National Health System (NHS) Economic Evaluations Database, the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database, and EconLit were searched for cost-effectiveness studies of DMTs for RRMS that used decision-analytic models, published in English between 1 January 2012 and 24 December 2017. The inclusion criteria were as follows: being a full economic evaluation, a decision-analytic model was used, the target population concerned adult patients with RRMS, and being available in full-text format. Studies were not excluded based on the methodological quality. The background information of the included studies, as well as specific information on the components of the economic models related to the areas of recommendation from previous reviews were extracted.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies from ten countries were included. The model structure of these studies has converged over time, characterizing the course of disease progression in terms of changes in disability and the occurrence of relapses over time. Variations were found in model approach; data sources for the natural course of the disease and comparative efficacy between DMTs; number of lines of treatment modeled; long-term efficacy waning and treatment discontinuation assumptions; type of withdrawal; and criteria for selecting adverse events. Main areas for improvement include using long-term time horizons and societal perspective; reporting relevant health outcomes; conducting scenario analyses using different sources of natural history and utility values; and reporting how the model was validated.

CONCLUSION

The structure of economic models used in CEAs of DMTs for RRMS has converged over time. However, variation remains in terms of model approach, inputs, and assumptions. Though some recommendations from previous reviews have been incorporated in later models, areas for improvement remain.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of beta-interferon and glatiramer acetate for treating multiple sclerosis: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

At the time of publication of the most recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance [technology appraisal (TA) 32] in 2002 on beta-interferon (IFN-β) and glatiramer acetate (GA) for multiple sclerosis, there was insufficient evidence of their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To undertake (1) systematic reviews of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IFN-β and GA in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) and clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) compared with best supportive care (BSC) and each other, investigating annualised relapse rate (ARR) and time to disability progression confirmed at 3 months and 6 months and (2) cost-effectiveness assessments of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for CIS and RRMS compared with BSC and each other.

REVIEW METHODS

Searches were undertaken in January and February 2016 in databases including The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and the Science Citation Index. We limited some database searches to specific start dates based on previous, relevant systematic reviews. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts with recourse to a third when needed. The Cochrane tool and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and Philips checklists were used for appraisal. Narrative synthesis and, when possible, random-effects meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed. Cost-effectiveness analysis used published literature, findings from the Department of Health's risk-sharing scheme (RSS) and expert opinion. A de novo economic model was built for CIS. The base case used updated RSS data, a NHS and Personal Social Services perspective, a 50-year time horizon, 2014/15 prices and a discount rate of 3.5%. Outcomes are reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We undertook probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 6420 publications were identified, of which 63 relating to 35 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. In total, 86% had a high risk of bias. There was very little difference between drugs in reducing moderate or severe relapse rates in RRMS. All were beneficial compared with BSC, giving a pooled rate ratio of 0.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.76] for ARR and a hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.87) for time to disability progression confirmed at 3 months. NMA suggested that 20 mg of GA given subcutaneously had the highest probability of being the best at reducing ARR. Three separate cost-effectiveness searches identified > 2500 publications, with 26 included studies informing the narrative synthesis and model inputs. In the base case using a modified RSS the mean incremental cost was £31,900 for pooled DMTs compared with BSC and the mean incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were 0.943, giving an ICER of £33,800 per QALY gained for people with RRMS. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis the ICER was £34,000 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analysis, using the assessment group inputs gave an ICER of £12,800 per QALY gained for pooled DMTs compared with BSC. Pegylated IFN-β-1 (125 µg) was the most cost-effective option of the individual DMTs compared with BSC (ICER £7000 per QALY gained); GA (20 mg) was the most cost-effective treatment for CIS (ICER £16,500 per QALY gained).

LIMITATIONS

Although we built a de novo model for CIS that incorporated evidence from our systematic review of clinical effectiveness, our findings relied on a population diagnosed with CIS before implementation of the revised 2010 McDonald criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

DMTs were clinically effective for RRMS and CIS but cost-effective only for CIS. Both RCT evidence and RSS data are at high risk of bias. Research priorities include comparative studies with longer follow-up and systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016043278.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Disease-Modifying Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Literature Review of Cost-Effectiveness Studies

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the central nervous system. MS is considered incurable; however, disease treatment has advanced significantly over the past several decades with the introduction of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). The current study reviewed the cost-effectiveness analyses of DMTs in relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of bibliographic databases was conducted to identify economic evaluations published after 2007. The relevant population, intervention, comparators, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) were considered. The outcomes of interest were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), net monetary benefits, incremental benefits, and incremental costs. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement was used to assess the reporting quality of published studies.

RESULTS

A total of 1370 potentially relevant citations were identified, of which 33 published articles and four Health Technology Assessment (HTA) reports prepared for the UK were included in the final analysis. Almost all studies were based on a health economic model and considered RRMS as the phase of disease at study entry. The studies were conducted in 10 different countries, with approximately 50% based in the US. Study outcomes were rarely comparable due to the different settings, input data, and assumptions. Even within the same country, the discrepancy between study criteria was considerable. The compliance with reporting standards of the CHEERS statement was generally high.

CONCLUSIONS

Internationally, a large number of health economic assessments of DMTs in RRMS were available, yielding difficult to compare, and at times conflicting, results.

Cost-effectiveness of oral agents in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis compared to interferon-based therapy in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Promising clinical and humanistic outcomes are associated with the use of new oral agents in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). This is the first cost-effectiveness study comparing these medications in Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, and interferon (IFN)-b1a products (Avonex and Rebif) as first-line therapies in the treatment of patients with RRMS from a Saudi payer perspective.

DESIGN

Cohort Simulation Model (Markov Model).

SETTING

Tertiary care hospital.

METHODS

A hypothetical cohort of 1000 RRMS Saudi patients was assumed to enter a Markov model model with a time horizon of 20 years and an annual cycle length. The model was developed based on an expanded disability status scale (EDSS) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the five disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) from a healthcare system perspective. Data on EDSS progression and relapse rates were obtained from the literature; cost data were obtained from King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Results were expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and net monetary benefits (NMB) in Saudi Riyals and converted to equivalent $US. The base-case willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was assumed to be $100000 (SAR375000). One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to test the robustness of the model.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

ICERs and NMB.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis results showed Rebif as the optimal therapy at a WTP threshold of $100000. Avonex had the lowest ICER value of $337282/QALY when compared to Rebif. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the results were sensitive to utility weights of health state three and four and the cost of Rebif.

CONCLUSION

None of the DMDs were found to be cost-effective in the treatment of RRMS at a WTP threshold of $100000 in this analysis. The DMDs would only be cost-effective at a WTP above $300000.

LIMITATIONS

The current analysis did not reflect the Saudi population preference in valuation of health states and did not consider the societal perspective in terms of cost.

Efficacy of fingolimod is superior to injectable disease modifying therapies in second-line therapy of relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis

Although fingolimod is registered in Europe for treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) if earlier disease modifying therapy (DMT) has failed, no data regarding its efficacy in this patient group are available. This observational cohort study of the NeuroTransData network includes German RRMS outpatients with failure of earlier therapy with injectable DMT (iDMT), therefore switching to either another iDMT (n = 133) or to fingolimod (n = 300). Statistical comparison of clinical baseline characteristics showed more severely affected patients in the fingolimod group. A propensity-score matched group comparison was performed (n = 99 in each group) covering more than 2-year observation time. Fingolimod showed statistically significant superior efficacy in comparison to iDMT regarding annualized relapse rate (0.21 versus 0.33 per year), time-to-relapse and likelihood of relapse (iDMT hazard ratio 1.7), proportion and likelihood of patients with EDSS progression (15.10 versus 31.00 %; iDMT hazard ratio 1.7), persistence on medication and likelihood of discontinuation (iDMT hazard ratio 3.0). Significantly more patients were free of relapse and EDSS progression with fingolimod than with their second iDMT (64.4 versus 46.5 %, p < 0.03). This real-life evidence in German RRMS outpatients support data from controlled clinical studies and can quantitatively support clinical decision finding processes if iDMT therapy fails in RRMS.

Cost-effectiveness of natalizumab vs fingolimod for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: analyses in Sweden

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of natalizumab vs fingolimod over 2 years in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients and patients with rapidly evolving severe disease in Sweden.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the incremental cost per relapse avoided of natalizumab and fingolimod from the perspective of the Swedish healthcare system. Modeled 2-year costs in Swedish kronor of treating RRMS patients included drug acquisition costs, administration and monitoring costs, and costs of treating MS relapses. Effectiveness was measured in terms of MS relapses avoided using data from the AFFIRM and FREEDOMS trials for all patients with RRMS and from post-hoc sub-group analyses for patients with rapidly evolving severe disease. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that, in all patients with MS, treatment with fingolimod costs less (440,463 Kr vs 444,324 Kr), but treatment with natalizumab results in more relapses avoided (0.74 vs 0.59), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 25,448 Kr per relapse avoided. In patients with rapidly evolving severe disease, natalizumab dominated fingolimod. Results of the sensitivity analysis demonstrate the robustness of the model results. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 500,000 Kr per relapse avoided, natalizumab is cost-effective in >80% of simulations in both patient populations.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include absence of data from direct head-to-head studies comparing natalizumab and fingolimod, use of relapse rate reduction rather than sustained disability progression as the primary model outcome, assumption of 100% adherence to MS treatment, and exclusion of adverse event costs in the model.

CONCLUSIONS

Natalizumab remains a cost-effective treatment option for patients with MS in Sweden. In the RRMS patient population, the incremental cost per relapse avoided is well below a 500,000 Kr WTP threshold per relapse avoided. In the rapidly evolving severe disease patient population, natalizumab dominates fingolimod.

Outcomes of switching directly to oral fingolimod from injectable therapies: Results of the randomized, open-label, multicenter, Evaluate Patient OutComes (EPOC) study in relapsing multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

The Evaluate Patient OutComes (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01216072) study was conducted in North America to assess patient- and physician-reported treatment satisfaction in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) who received oral fingolimod for 6 months after switching from an injectable disease-modifying therapy (iDMT), without an intervening washout.

METHODS

In this open-label, multicenter study, patients were randomized 3:1 to once-daily fingolimod 0.5mg or iDMT. The primary study objective was to evaluate differences in satisfaction measured using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication v1.4.

RESULTS

Of 1053 patients randomized, 790 patients received fingolimod and 263 patients received iDMT. Treatment satisfaction improved significantly in patients who switched to fingolimod compared with those who continued iDMT. Patients also reported significant improvements in health-related quality of life, reduced depression, and reduced fatigue severity after a switch to fingolimod. No difference between the treatment groups was detected on the Patient Reported Indices for MS Activities scale. The safety profile of fingolimod was consistent with that reported in the pivotal phase 3 studies. The most commonly reported adverse events were more prevalent in patients who switched to fingolimod than in those who continued iDMT (headache: 12% vs 3%; fatigue: 12% vs 6%). No significant relationship between lymphocyte counts and infection rates was observed and there was no evidence of additive immune-system effects, which might be expected when switching to a different class of immunomodulatory therapy with no intervening washout.

CONCLUSION

Patients who switched from iDMT to fingolimod had significant improvements in most self-reported outcomes compared with those who continued iDMT.

Cost-effectiveness analyses in multiple sclerosis: a review of modelling approaches

The growing number of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and the high acquisition costs of these DMTs are likely to increase the demand for information on their cost effectiveness. To improve the comparability and applicability of the findings from future cost-effectiveness analyses, it would be useful to have a clear understanding of the methodological challenges of modelling the cost effectiveness of DMTs in MS and the different approaches taken by such studies to date. In contrast to previous review studies, this review focuses on long-term time horizon (≥10 years) simulation-based cost-effectiveness analyses with homogeneous contexts of analysis (i.e. those with similar study objectives, comparators, and target populations) published over the past decade. By doing so, it provides a clearer picture of how modelling approaches taken in the existing studies truly differ across studies, and reveals major areas for improvement in conducting future cost-effectiveness analyses of DMTs for patients with MS.

Pharmacokinetic evaluation of fingolimod for the treatment of multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Fingolimod is a sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulator with a novel mechanism of action and the first oral drug approved for the treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). Fingolimod reduces relapses more effectively than intramuscular interferon β1a and delays disability progression. Associated safety risks are bradyarrhythmia and atrioventricular block following the initial dose, requiring monitoring.

AREAS COVERED

This article examines the characteristics of fingolimod, its pharmacokinetic properties and the efficacy and tolerability in MS. Information on the pharmacology and mechanisms of action is also provided.

EXPERT OPINION

Fingolimod is an effective therapy for relapsing forms of MS in a convenient oral dose. Fingolimod may target not only inflammation but potentially also neurodegeneration. Antagonizing astrocyte sphingosine signaling may help explain the reduction in cerebral atrophy observed in Phase III trials. Long-term data about the safety of fingolimod are needed.

Cost of care according to disease-modifying therapy in Mexicans with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Limited data exist on the costs of care of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) in low- to middle-income nations. The purpose of this study was to describe the economic burden associated with care of Mexican patients with relapsing-remitting MS in a representative sample of the largest institution of the Mexican public healthcare system. We analysed individual data of 492 patients (67% women) with relapsing-remitting MS registered from January 2009 to February 2011 at the Mexican Social Security Institute. Direct costs were measured about the use of diagnostic tests, disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), symptoms control, medical consultations, relapses, intensive care and rehabilitation. Four groups were defined according to DMT alternatives: (1) interferon beta (IFNβ)-1a, 6 million units (MU); (2) IFNβ-1a, 12MU; (3) IFNβ-1b, 8MU; and (4) glatiramer acetate. All patients received DMTs for at least 1 year. The most frequently used DMT was glatiramer acetate (45.5%), followed by IFNβ-1a 12MU (22.6%), IFNβ-1b 8MU (20.7%), and IFNβ-1a 6MU (11.2%). The mean cost of a specialised medical consultation was €74.90 (US $107.00). A single relapse had a mean total cost of €2,505.97 (US $3,579.96). No differences were found in annualised relapse rates and costs of relapses according to DMT. However, a significant difference was observed in total annual costs according to treatment groups (glatiramer acetate being the most expensive), mainly due to differences in unitary costs of alternatives. From the public institutional perspective, when equipotent DMTs are used in patients with comparable characteristics, the costs of DMTs largely determine the total expenses associated with care of patients with relapsing-remitting MS in a middle-income country.