A Model for Assessing the Clinical and Economic Benefits of Bone-forming Agents for Reducing Fractures in Postmenopausal Women at High, Near-term Risk of Osteoporotic Fracture

Cost-effectiveness analysis of romosozumab for severe postmenopausal osteoporosis at very high risk of fracture in Mexico

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to assess the cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide, both sequenced to denosumab, for the treatment of severe postmenopausal osteoporosis at very high risk of fractures in Mexican women.

METHODS

A Markov model was used to assess the relative cost effectiveness of 1 year of romosozumab versus 2 years of teriparatide, both sequenced to denosumab for a total treatment duration of 5 years. Outcomes for a cohort of women with a mean age of 74 years, a T-score ≤-2.5 and a previous fragility fracture were simulated over a lifetime horizon. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Mexican healthcare system and used a discount rate of 5% per annum. To inform relative fracture incidence, the bone mineral density (BMD) advantage of romosozumab over teriparatide was translated into relative risks of fracture, using relationships provided by a meta-regression of osteoporosis therapy trials. Outcomes were assessed in terms of lifetime costs (2023 Mexican pesos), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and life-years gained (LYs).

RESULTS

Base case results showed that, compared with teriparatide/ denosumab, romosozumab/ denosumab reduced costs by $51,363 MXN per patient and yielded 0.03 additional QALYs and 0.01 LYs. Scenario analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed that results are robust to uncertainty in model assumptions and inputs.

CONCLUSIONS

Results show that romosozumab/ denosumab produces greater health benefits at a lower total cost than teriparatide/ denosumab.

Cost-effectiveness of romosozumab for the treatment of postmenopausal women at very high risk of fracture in Canada

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of 1 year of romosozumab followed by alendronate versus oral bisphosphonates alone in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis at very high risk for fracture in Canada. Results showed that romosozumab sequenced to alendronate is a cost-effective treatment option, dominating both alendronate and risedronate alone.

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the value of romosozumab sequenced to alendronate compared to alendronate or risedronate alone, for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women with a history of osteoporotic fracture and who are at very high risk for future fracture in Canada.

METHODS

A Markov model followed a hypothetical cohort of postmenopausal osteoporotic women at very high risk for future fractures, to estimate the cost-effectiveness of romosozumab and alendronate compared to oral bisphosphonates alone. A total treatment period of 5 years was assumed. Quality-adjusted life years and costs were estimated for each comparator across health states defined by different types of fragility fractures.

RESULTS

Romosozumab/alendronate was associated with a lifetime gain of 0.103 and 0.127 QALYs and a cost reduction of $343 and $3805, relative to alendronate and risedronate, respectively. These results were driven by a reduction of the number of fractures (2561 per 1000 patients, versus 2700 for alendronate and 2724 for risedronate over lifetime). Romosozumab/alendronate had the highest probability of being cost-effective, relative to alendronate and risedronate, at any willingness to pay threshold value.

CONCLUSION

Romosozumab/alendronate was associated with reduced costs and greater benefit relative to other comparators. Probabilistic, deterministic, and scenario analyses indicate that romosozumab/alendronate represents the best value for money; the uncertainty analyses are robust, and therefore romosozumab should be considered for reimbursement by public drug plans in Canada .

[The DRFZ-a pioneer in research on the interaction between immune and stromal cells during de- and regeneration of the musculoskeletal system]

Rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis are two related chronic diseases of the musculoskeletal system which are particularly pronounced in the region of joints and bones. Their pathogeneses are associated with chronic inflammation, which can disrupt homeostasis in bones and articular cartilage. Degradation products deriving from articular cartilage can contribute to the exacerbation of inflammation in the joint region. Mechanical stimuli and blood vessels also play a central role in both the regulation of bone growth as well as in the regeneration of bone tissue. Not only chronic inflammatory processes but also hormonal changes after menopause or undesired effects of glucocorticoid therapy have an influence on the balance between bone resorption and deposition, by promoting the former and reducing the latter. This results in decreased bone quality and, in some cases, considerable loss of bone or osteoporosis. An in-depth understanding of these processes at the molecular, cellular, and tissue level, as well as of the changes present in chronic inflammatory diseases, has been the focus of research at the German Rheumatism Research Center (Deutsches Rheuma-Forschungszentrum, DRFZ) since its foundation. Based on an improved understanding of these mechanisms, the DRFZ aims to develop improved prevention and treatment strategies with effects even in early disease stages.

Cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide for severe postmenopausal osteoporosis in Japan

This study assessed the cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate, for the treatment of severe postmenopausal osteoporosis in Japan, using bone mineral density (BMD) efficacy data. Results show that romosozumab/alendronate produces greater health benefits at a lower cost than teriparatide/alendronate.

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to assess the cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate, for the treatment of severe postmenopausal osteoporosis in Japanese women previously treated with bisphosphonates.

METHODS

A Markov model was used to assess the relative cost effectiveness of 1 year of romosozumab versus 2 years of teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate for a total treatment duration of 5 years. Outcomes for a cohort of women with a mean age of 78 years, a T-score ≤-2.5 and a previous fragility fracture were simulated over a lifetime horizon. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Japanese healthcare system and used a discount rate of 2% per annum. To inform relative fracture incidence, the bone mineral density (BMD) advantage of romosozumab over teriparatide was translated into relative risks of fracture, using relationships provided by a meta-regression of osteoporosis therapy trials. Outcomes were assessed in terms of lifetime costs (2020 US dollars) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

RESULTS

Base case results showed that, compared with teriparatide/alendronate, romosozumab/alendronate reduced costs by $5134 per patient and yielded 0.045 additional QALYs. Scenario analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed that results are robust to uncertainty in model assumptions and inputs.

CONCLUSION

Results show that romosozumab/alendronate produces greater health benefits at a lower total cost than teriparatide/alendronate.

Fracture Healing Research-Shift towards In Vitro Modeling?

Fractures are one of the most frequently occurring traumatic events worldwide. Approximately 10% of fractures lead to bone healing disorders, resulting in strain for affected patients and enormous costs for society. In order to shed light into underlying mechanisms of bone regeneration (habitual or disturbed), and to develop new therapeutic strategies, various in vivo, ex vivo and in vitro models can be applied. Undeniably, in vivo models include the systemic and biological situation. However, transferability towards the human patient along with ethical concerns regarding in vivo models have to be considered. Fostered by enormous technical improvements, such as bioreactors, on-a-chip-technologies and bone tissue engineering, sophisticated in vitro models are of rising interest. These models offer the possibility to use human cells from individual donors, complex cell systems and 3D models, therefore bridging the transferability gap, providing a platform for the introduction of personalized precision medicine and finally sparing animals. Facing diverse processes during fracture healing and thus various scientific opportunities, the reliability of results oftentimes depends on the choice of an appropriate model. Hence, we here focus on categorizing available models with respect to the requirements of the scientific approach.

An Updated Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Drugs for Osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Considering the heavy economic burden of osteoporotic fractures, the limits of healthcare resources, and the recent availability of new anti-osteoporosis drugs, there is continuing interest in economic evaluation studies of osteoporosis management strategies.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to (1) systematically review recent economic evaluations of drugs for osteoporosis and (2) to apply an osteoporosis-specific guideline to critically appraise them.

METHODS

A literature search was undertaken using PubMed, EMBASE, National Health Service Economic Evaluation database, and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry to identify original articles containing economic evaluations of anti-osteoporosis drugs, published between 1 July, 2013 and 31 December, 2019. A recent European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases-International Osteoporosis Foundation (ESCEO-IOF) guideline for the conduct and reporting of economic evaluations in osteoporosis was used to assess the quality of included articles.

RESULTS

The database search retrieved 3860 records, of which 27 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These studies were conducted in 15 countries; 12 active drugs were assessed, including various traditional pharmacological treatments such as bisphosphonates, raloxifene, strontium ranelate, denosumab, and teriparatide, and new agents such as abaloparatide, romosozumab, and gastro-resistant risedronate. Eight out of 12 studies that compared traditional oral bisphosphonates to other active interventions (denosumab, zoledronic acid, gastro-resistant risedronate, and teriparatide) suggested that the other active agents were generally cost-effective or dominant. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of sequential therapy has recently been assessed and indications are that it can lead to extra health benefits (larger gains in quality-adjusted life-year). The key drivers of cost effectiveness included baseline fracture risk, drug effect on the risk of fractures, drug cost, and medication adherence/persistence. The current average score for quality assessment was 17 out of 25 (range 2-15); room for improvement was observed for most studies, which could potentially be explained by the fact that most studies were published prior to the osteoporosis-specific guideline. Greater adherence to guideline recommendations was expected for future studies. The quality of reporting was also suboptimal, especially with regard to treatment side effects, treatment effect after discontinuation, and medication adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated review provides an overview of recently published cost-effectiveness analyses. In comparison with a previous review, recent economic evaluations of anti-osteoporosis drugs were conducted in more countries and included more active drugs and sequential therapy as interventions/comparators. The updated economic evidence could help decision makers prioritize health interventions and the unmet/unreported quality issues indicated by the osteoporosis-specific guideline could be useful in improving the transparency, quality, and comparability of future economic evaluations in osteoporosis.

Sclerostin inhibition: A novel target for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis

Osteoporosis, a widespread skeletal disorder with a substantial economic load, is characterized by increased porosity of the bones resulting in vulnerability to fractures. When activated, the canonical Wnt signaling pathway results in osteoblastogenesis and bone formation. A Wnt ligand forms a complex with low-density lipoprotein receptor-related proteins 5 and 6 (Lrp5/6) and stimulates intracellular signaling cascades, leading to nuclear translocation of β-catenin and transcription of downstream molecules involved in osteoblast differentiation, maturation, and survival. Sclerostin (SOST), a glycoprotein produced by osteocytes, is an extracellular Wnt antagonist that blocks the binding of Wnt ligands to Lrp5/6, preventing the activation of the pathway and osteoblast-mediated bone formation subsequently. Inhibition of SOST represents a new therapeutic paradigm for the treatment of osteoporosis. Monoclonal antibodies to SOST include romosozumab, blosozumab, and setrusumab. With its unique dual effect of increasing bone formation (anabolic action) and decreasing bone resorption, the Food and Drug Administration approved romosozumab, a promising new treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Its efficacy and safety have been established in trials. However, patients at high risk of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events should not be prescribed romosozumab.

Systematic evidence of health economic evaluation of drugs for postmenopausal osteoporosis: A quality appraisal

This paper systematically and critically reviewed all published economic evaluations of drugs for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. A systematic search was conducted using relevant databases for economic evaluations to include all relevant English articles published between January 2008 to January 2020. After extracting the key study characteristics, methods and outcomes, we evaluated each article using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) instruments. A total of 49 studies met the inclusion criteria. Majority of studies were funded by the industry and reported favorable cost-effectiveness. Based on the QHES total scores, studies (n = 35) were found to be industry-funded with higher QHES mean 82.44 ± 8.69 as compared with nonindustry funding studies (n = 11) with mean 72.22 ± 17.67. The overall mean QHES scores were found to be higher 79.06 ± 11.84, representing high quality (75–100) compared to CHEERS scores (%) 75.03 ± 11.21. The statistical pairwise comparison between CHEERS mean (75.03 ± 11.21) and QHES mean (79.06 ± 11.84) were not statistically significant (P = 0.10) whereas, QHES score showed higher means as compared to CHEERS. This study suggests the overall quality of the published literatures was relatively few high-quality health economic evaluation demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of drugs for postmenopausal osteoporosis, and the majority of the literature highlights that methodological shortcoming.

Fragility Vertebral Compression Fractures in Postmenopausal Women: The Role of a Fracture Liaison Service Program

BACKGROUND

As the aging population increases in the United States, so has the prevalence of osteoporosis (10.2 million adults aged 50 years and older in 2010). Programs to manage the increased incidence of fragility fractures in such patients particularly the postmenopausal women are the priority. Programs such as the Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) might be the answer.

METHODS

Data of 256 postmenopausal women with vertebral compression fractures treated with vertebroplasty between 2012 and 2017 were divided into 2 groups. Group A were patients seen between 2012 and 2014 before the establishment of the FLS program at the clinic. Group B were patients seen between 2015 and 2017 who presented to the FLS program in our clinic. Data collected included demographics, refracture rates, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan T-scores, fracture risk score (FRAX), serum calcium and vitamin D levels, and comorbid conditions.

RESULTS

There were 103 female patients with a mean age of 79.75 years (standard deviation [SD] ± 10.86) in group A, while group B had 153 patients with a mean age of 75.66 years (SD ± 10.78). There was no significant difference in the DEXA scan T-scores, FRAX scores, and mean serum calcium and vitamin D levels; however, there was a significant reduction in the refracture rate for vertebral compression fractures (P = .003).

CONCLUSION

FLS programs, when implemented, will have a beneficial effect in reducing refracture rates of postmenopausal women with osteoporotic fragility fractures.

Testing a theoretical model of imminent fracture risk in elderly women: an observational cohort analysis of the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study

We examined the underlying relationship between fracture risk factors and their imminent risk. Results suggested that having past year fracture, worse past year general health, worse past year physical functioning, and lower past year BMD T-score directly predicted higher imminent fracture risk. Past year falls indirectly predicted imminent risk through physical functioning and general health.

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to examine direct and indirect effects of several factors on imminent (1 year) fracture risk.

METHODS

Data from women age 65 and older from population-based Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study were used. Predictors were identified from study years 5 and 10, and imminent fracture data (1-year fracture) came from years 6 and 11 (year 5 predicts year 6, year 10 predicts year 11). A structural equation model (SEM) was used to test the theoretical construct. General health and physical functioning were measured as latent variables using items from the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and bone mineral density (BMD) T-score was a latent variable based on observed site-specific BMD data (spine L1-L4, femoral neck, total hip). Observed variables were fractures and falls. Model fit was evaluated using root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), Tucker Lewis index (TLI), and comparative fit index (CFI).

RESULTS

The analysis included 3298 women. Model fit tests showed that the SEM fit the data well; χ²(172) = 1122.10 < .001, RMSEA = .03, TLI = .99, CFI = .99. Results suggested that having past year fracture, worse past year general health, worse past year physical functioning, and lower past year BMD T-score directly predicted higher risk of fracture in the subsequent year (p < .001). Past year falls had a statistically significant but indirect effect on imminent fracture risk through physical functioning and general health (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

We found several direct and indirect pathways that predicted imminent fracture risk in elderly women. Future studies should extend this work by developing risk scoring methods and defining imminent risk thresholds.

Patient-Level Modeling Approach Using Discrete-Event Simulation: A Cost-Effectiveness Study of Current Treatment Guidelines for Women with Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Decision tree and Markov models have been the most commonly used modeling methods in health economic evaluations. Both methods are known for their limitations. Discrete-event simulation (DES), an event-driven model in continuous time at the patient level, is a relatively new method in health economic evaluations that addresses some limitations of the common modeling techniques. Specifically, with the advent of personalized medicine, conventional methods for value assessment that are based on population-level measures might not be appropriate. The best treatment would depend on patient characteristics and clinical profiles. Value assessment of health interventions can vary substantially and may lead to different health decision making due to patient heterogeneity. As such, modeling at the patient level is an appropriate approach for value assessment of health interventions. The DES model has several advantages, such as flexibility, ability to reflect patient heterogeneity, increased precision, and better characterization of modeling uncertainty, that may be preferred to decision tree and Markov models. In addition, with increasing health care spending and drug prices, it is important to quantify value of available treatment options for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO). The purpose of this Viewpoints article was to describe and demonstrate an application of a DES model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the current treatment guidelines for women with PMO. In particular, the DES model indicated that the optimal treatment at the common willingness-to-pay thresholds between $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and $150,000 per QALY was denosumab. Analysis of patient heterogeneity in terms of low, medium, high, and very high risk of fractures resulted in a similar conclusion. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this study was received through the PhRMA Foundation Value Assessment Challenge Award. The author has no conflicts of interest to declare.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Sequential Treatment of Abaloparatide Followed by Alendronate Versus Teriparatide Followed by Alendronate in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis in the United States

BACKGROUND

The US Food and Drug Administration has recently approved abaloparatide (ABL) for treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) at high risk of fracture. With increasing health care spending and drug prices, it is important to quantify the value of newly available treatment options for PMO.

OBJECTIVE

To determine cost-effectiveness of ABL compared with teriparatide (TPTD) for treatment of women with PMO in the United States.

METHODS

A discrete-event simulation (DES) model was developed to assess cost-effectiveness of ABL from the US health care perspective. The model included three 18-month treatment strategies with either placebo (PBO), TPTD, or ABL, all followed by additional 5-year treatment with alendronate (ALN). High-risk patients were defined as women with PMO ⩾65 years old with a prior vertebral fracture. Baseline clinical event rates, risk reductions, and patient characteristics were based on the Abaloparatide Comparator Trial in Vertebral Endpoints (ACTIVE) trial.

RESULTS

Over a 10-year period, the DES model yielded average total discounted per-patient costs of $10 212, $46 783, and $26 837 and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of 6.742, 6.781, and 6.792 for PBO/ALN, TPTD/ALN, and ABL/ALN, respectively. Compared with TPTD/ALN, ABL/ALN accrued higher QALYs at lower cost and produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $333 266/QALY relative to PBO/ALN. In high-risk women, ABL/ALN also had more QALYs and less cost over TPTD/ALN and yielded an ICER of $188 891/QALY relative to PBO/ALN. Conclusion and Relevance: ABL is a dominant treatment strategy over TPTD. In women with PMO at high risk of fracture, ABL is an alternative cost-effective treatment.

Abaloparatide: Review of a Next-Generation Parathyroid Hormone Agonist

OBJECTIVE

To review the efficacy, safety, and economics of abaloparatide in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed (1966 to October 2017), Clinicaltrials.gov (October 2017), and Scopus (1970 to October 2017) were searched using abaloparatide, Tymlos, BA058, PTHrP 1-34 analog, and parathyroid hormone-related peptide 1-34 analog.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Human studies published in peer-reviewed publications in English were the primary sources for efficacy, safety, and economic data.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In the 2 randomized, published clinical studies of 24 weeks and 18 months duration, bone mineral density changes were higher for abaloparatide (lumbar spine, 6.7%-11.2%; femoral head, 3.1%-3.2%; total hip, 2.6%-4.2%) compared with placebo (lumbar spine, 0.6%-1.6%; femoral head, -0.4% to 0.8%; total hip, -0.1% to 0.4%; P < 0.05) and compared with teriparatide in the 24-week study (total hip 2.6% vs +0.5%, P < 0.05). New vertebral and nonvertebral fractures occurred in 0.6% and 2.7% of patients on abaloparatide compared with 4.2% and 4.7% on placebo in the 18-month study ( P < 0.05). Abaloparatide appears to have a somewhat higher risk for adverse effects, discontinuation as a result of adverse effects, and serious or severe adverse effects than teriparatide, but teriparatide has a higher risk for hypercalcemia. Pharmacoeconomic modeling appears to favor abaloparatide if differences in efficacy and cost are maintained.

CONCLUSION

Abaloparatide, which has less effect on osteoclasts, is an alternative to teriparatide in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis who are at high risk for fractures or who have failed antiresorptive therapy based on initial clinical studies and economic modeling.