Cost-Utility Analysis of Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis in Thailand

Physicians' and patients' perception of biosimilars and factors affecting biosimilar prescribing in selected Asian countries: a survey study

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated physicians' and patients' beliefs about biosimilars in Hong Kong, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

An online survey administered to physicians (dermatologists, n = 119; gastroenterologists, n = 148; rheumatologists, n = 161) between 22 October 2021 and 7 January 2022, and patients (n = 90) with rheumatic or inflammatory bowel disease between 25 October 2021 and 12 April 2022.

RESULTS

Most (68%) physicians reported having a strong knowledge about biosimilars, yet 49% indicated that biosimilars are readily available to them. Physicians cited potential cost savings (81%) as the main benefit of biosimilars, and cost/coverage support (36%), patient support (25%), and increasing biosimilar awareness/education (24%) as main strategies for improving usage. Few (21%) patients reported having a strong knowledge about biosimilars. Patients cited offering alternatives in case of drug shortages (77%) as the main benefit of biosimilars, and cost/coverage support (53%), increasing awareness of product profile (22%), and providing biosimilars with a good efficacy profile/effective product (19%) as main strategies for improving usage.

CONCLUSION

Programs focused on cost/coverage support, patient support, and biosimilar awareness could improve acceptance of biosimilars for chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases in Asian countries, thereby increasing patient access to essential biologic therapies.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of biologic sequential treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis: A Malaysian healthcare system perspective

OBJECTIVE

In Malaysia, there is now a dearth of recommendations pertaining to the priority of biologic treatments for the effective management of psoriasis, given the multitude of available therapeutic alternatives. Present analysis reports results of a cost-effectiveness model that determines the most optimal arrangement of biologic treatments, with a particular focus of adding biosimilars to the existing treatment pathway for psoriasis in Malaysia.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to compare the cost effectiveness of various biologic sequential treatments in a hypothetical cohort of moderate to severe psoriasis patient in Malaysia over a lifetime horizon. The model simulated the progression of patients through three lines of active biologic therapy, before transitioning to best supportive care. Costs and effects were discounted annually at a rate of 3%.

RESULTS

First line secukinumab has produced lowest incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) when compared to first line systemic [ICERs value; US$152,474 (first set analysis) and US$110,572 (second set analysis)] and first line phototherapy [ICERs value; US$147,057 (first set analysis) and US$107,616 (second set analysis)]. However, these values were slightly higher than the Malaysian based threshold of three times gross domestic product per capita, US$104,337. A 40% reduction in the unit costs of reference biologics renders most of the evaluated treatment sequences cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

Adding biosimilar to the current treatment sequence could achieve cost savings ranging from 4.3% to 10.8% without significant loss of effectiveness. Given the significant impact of comorbidities and the resulting decline in quality of life among individuals with psoriasis, it may be justifiable to establish a threshold of up to US$184,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for the provision of therapies in the context of Malaysia.

Cost and Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Psoriatic Arthritis: An Updated Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an inflammatory disease characterised by a variety of clinical manifestations. Considering the economic burden posed by PsA and the increasing number of treatment options, economic evaluations are required to better allocate available resources. This work aims to update a previous published literature review on PsA cost-of-illness and cost-effectiveness analysis.

METHODS

A search was performed of English-language literature between January 2017 and March 20, 2024 in Medline/PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library using the terms 'psoriatic arthritis', 'cost of illness' and 'cost effectiveness'. Data on decision model, time horizon, population, treatment options, perspective, type of costs, relevant results and authors' conclusion were extracted from the reviewed articles. Finally, the quality of the included studies was evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria: 16 cost-of-illness and 11 cost-effectiveness/cost-utility analyses. PsA is characterised by high direct and indirect costs. Drug costs as well as hospitalisation and absenteeism were the major drivers of the observed costs. The cost-effectiveness analyses reported the dominance or the cost effectiveness of biologic therapies compared with non-biologic PsA treatment. Biological options like bimekizumab and ixekizumab have demonstrated a better cost-effectiveness profile in PsA patients compared with other treatments (i.e., other biological treatments).

CONCLUSIONS

There was an increased number of economic evaluations compared with the previous review. PsA is still associated with significant economic burden worldwide. The main cost was represented by therapies, specifically biological therapies. Amongst the biological therapies, bimekizumab and ixekizumab appear to provide the most economic benefit. Finally, new economic studies are needed to enrich knowledge on the economic burden of subgroups of PsA patients as well as early treatment of PsA with new therapies.

Biosimilars in the Era of Artificial Intelligence-International Regulations and the Use in Oncological Treatments

This research is based on three fundamental aspects of successful biosimilar development in the challenging biopharmaceutical market. First, biosimilar regulations in eight selected countries: Japan, South Korea, the United States, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and South Africa, represent the four continents. The regulatory aspects of the countries studied are analyzed, highlighting the challenges facing biosimilars, including their complex approval processes and the need for standardized regulatory guidelines. There is an inconsistency depending on whether the biosimilar is used in a developed or developing country. In the countries observed, biosimilars are considered excellent alternatives to patent-protected biological products for the treatment of chronic diseases. In the second aspect addressed, various analytical AI modeling methods (such as machine learning tools, reinforcement learning, supervised, unsupervised, and deep learning tools) were analyzed to observe patterns that lead to the prevalence of biosimilars used in cancer to model the behaviors of the most prominent active compounds with spectroscopy. Finally, an analysis of the use of active compounds of biosimilars used in cancer and approved by the FDA and EMA was proposed.

Economic Evaluation of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared to Warfarin for Venous Thromboembolism in Thailand: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been used for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Thailand. However, they have not been listed in the National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM). A cost-effectiveness analysis is needed to aid policymakers in deciding whether DOACs should be listed in the NLEM. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of DOACs for patients with VTE in Thailand.

METHODS

A cohort-based state transition model was constructed from a societal perspective with a lifetime horizon. All available DOACs, including apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran, were compared with warfarin. A 6-month cycle length was used to capture all costs and health outcomes. The model consisted of nine health states, including VTE on treatment, VTE off treatment, recurrent VTE, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, post-intracranial bleeding, chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, and death. All inputs were based on a comprehensive literature review. The model outcomes included total cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) with a 3% annual discount rate. A fully incremental cost-effectiveness analysis and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained were calculated at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of THB 160,000/QALY ($5003). The robustness of the findings was assessed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

All DOACs were associated with a decreased risk of VTE recurrence and intracranial hemorrhage. In the base-case analysis, apixaban could increase 0.16 QALYs compared with warfarin. An ICER for apixaban was 269,809 Thai baht (THB)/QALY ($8437/QALY). Rivaroxaban had a better QALY than warfarin at 0.09 QALYs with an ICER of 757,363 THB/QALY ($23,682/QALY). Edoxaban and dabigatran could also increase by 0.10 QALYs with an ICER of 709,945 THB ($22,200) and 707,145 THB ($22,122)/QALY, respectively. Our probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that warfarin had a 99.8% possibility of being cost-effective, while apixaban had a 0.2% possibility of being cost-effective at the current WTP. Other DOACs had no possibility of being cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

All DOACs were not cost-effective for VTE treatment at the current WTP in Thailand. Apixaban is likely to be the best option among DOACs.