An analysis of the costs and treatment success of etanercept in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from the Dutch Arthritis and Biologicals in Children register

Quantifying hospital-associated costs, and accompanying travel costs and productivity losses, before and after withdrawing TNF-α inhibitors in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To quantify differences in hospital-associated costs, and accompanying travel costs and productivity losses, before and after withdrawing TNF-α inhibitors (TNFi) in JIA patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from electronic medical records of paediatric JIA patients treated with TNFi, which were immediately discontinued, spaced (increased treatment interval) or tapered (reduced subsequent doses). Costs of hospital-associated resource use (consultations, medication, radiology procedures, laboratory testing, procedures under general anaesthesia, hospitalization) and associated travel costs and productivity losses were quantified during clinically inactive disease until TNFi withdrawal (pre-withdrawal period) and compared with costs during the first and second year after withdrawal initiation (first and second year post-withdrawal).

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were included of whom 26 immediately discontinued TNFi, 30 spaced and zero tapered. Mean annual costs were €9165/patient on active treatment (pre-withdrawal) and decreased significantly to €5063/patient (-44.8%) and €6569/patient (-28.3%) in the first and second year post-withdrawal, respectively (P < 0.05). Of these total annual costs, travel costs plus productivity losses were €834/patient, €1180/patient, and €1320/patient in the three periods respectively. Medication comprised 80.7%, 61.5% and 72.4% of total annual costs in the pre-withdrawal, first and second year post-withdrawal period, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In the first two years after initiating withdrawal, the total annual costs were decreased compared with the pre-withdrawal period. However, cost reductions were lower in the second year compared with the first year post-withdrawal, primarily due to restarting or intensifying biologics. To support biologic withdrawal decisions, future research should assess the full long-term societal cost impacts, and include all biologics.

Economic evaluation of infliximab, synthetic triple therapy and methotrexate in the treatment of newly diagnosed juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of costs and short-term cost-effectiveness of infliximab plus methotrexate (IFX + MTX); triple therapy of hydroxychloquine, sulphasalazine, and methotrexate (TRIPLE); or methotrexate monotherapy (MTX) in patients with new-onset polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).

METHODS

In a prospective multicenter study (ACUTE-JIA), costs and health outcomes of 60 randomized patients with new-onset disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve polyarticular JIA were analyzed during the first year. A mapping algorithm was used to obtain utility values from Child Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ). Wallace criteriae were used to assess clinically inactive disease (CID). Linear regression with non-parametric bootstrapping was used to adjust imbalances at baseline.

RESULTS

Using prices for IFX biosimilar, adjusted annual mean (SD) costs of treatment (€) were 21,164 (4158), 12,136 (5286), and 18,300 (8635) on IFX + MTX, TRIPLE, and MTX, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for IFX + MTX as compared with TRIPLE or MTX were 3442 € or 678 € per additional month spent in CID. Mean (SD) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for IFX + MTX, TRIPLE and MTX were 0.755 (0.065), 0.725 (0.062), and 0.686 (0.124). ICER for IFX + MTX vs TRIPLE was 294,433 €, and for IFX + MTX vs MTX 31,435 € per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

In short-term, biosimilar IFX + MTX can be considered cost-effective when compared with MTX alone. TRIPLE was cost-effective when compared with MTX and showed cost advantage when compared with IFX + MTX. Cost per time spent in CID showed similar results than ICER evaluations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was primarily registered with the Ethical Board of Helsinki District University Hospital ( https://www.hus.fi ), clinical trial number 211864, and later with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01015547.

Economic impact of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) requires complex care that generate elevated costs, which results in a high economic impact for the family. The aim of this systematic review was to collect and cluster the information currently available on healthcare costs associated with JIA after the introduction of biological therapies.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Databases for studies from January 2000 to March 2021. Reviewers working independently and in duplicate appraised the quality and included primary studies that report total, direct and/or indirect costs related to JIA for at least one year. The costs were converted to United States dollars and an inflationary adjustment was made.

RESULTS

We found 18 eligible studies including data from 6,540 patients. Total costs were reported in 10 articles, ranging from $310 USD to $44,832 USD annually. Direct costs were reported in 16 articles ($193 USD to $32,446 USD), showing a proportion of 55 to 98 % of total costs. Those costs were mostly related to medications and medical appointments. Six studies reported indirect costs ($117 USD to $12,385 USD). Four studies reported costs according to JIA category observing the highest in polyarticular JIA. Total and direct costs increased up to three times after biological therapy initiation. A high risk of reporting bias and inconsistency of the methodology used were found.

CONCLUSION

The costs of JIA are substantial, and the highest are derived from medication and medical appointments. Indirect costs of JIA are underrepresented in costs analysis.

Evaluation of Real-World Healthcare Resource Utilization and Associated Costs in Children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Canadian Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a chronic rheumatic disease, whose multifaceted care path can lead to significant expenditure for the healthcare system. We aim to assess the real-world healthcare resource use (HCRU) and associated cost for children with JIA in a single center in Canada.

METHODS

A single-center consecutive cohort of newly diagnosed patients with JIA attending the pediatric rheumatology clinic from 2011 to 2019 was identified using an administrative data algorithm and electronic medical charts. HCRU was estimated from six administrative health databases that included hospital admissions, emergency, outpatient care, practitioners' visits, medication, and laboratory and imaging tests. Costs were assigned using appropriate sources. We reported the yearly overall and JIA-associated HCRU and costs 5 years prior to and 6 years after the first visit to the pediatric rheumatologist. The Zhao and Tian estimator was used to calculate cumulative mean costs over a 6-year timeframe. Results were stratified by disease subtype.

RESULTS

A total of 389 patients were identified. The yearly total overall mean costs per patient ranged between $804 and $4460 during the 5 years prior to the first visit to the pediatric rheumatologist and $8529 and $10,651 for the 6 years after. Medication cost, driven by use of biologic therapies, and outpatient visits were the greatest contributor to the total cost. The overall cumulative mean cost for 6 years of care was $48,649 per patient, while the JIA-associated cumulative mean cost was $26,820 per patient. During the first year of rheumatology care, systemic onset JIA had the highest cumulative mean overall cost, while oligoarticular JIA had the lowest cumulative mean cost.

CONCLUSION

The care pathway for children with JIA can be expensive, and complex-and varies by JIA subtype. Although the yearly total mean cost per patient was constant, the distribution of costs changes over time with the introduction of biologic therapies later in the care pathway. This study provides a better understanding of the JIA costs profile and can help inform future economic studies.

Adalimumab in combination with methotrexate for refractory uveitis associated with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a RCT

BACKGROUND

Children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) are at risk of uveitis. The role of adalimumab (Humira^®; AbbVie Inc., Ludwigshafen, Germany) in the management of uveitis in children needs to be determined.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) versus placebo with MTX alone, with regard to controlling disease activity in refractory uveitis associated with JIA.

DESIGN

This was a randomised (applying a ratio of 2 : 1 in favour of adalimumab), double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre parallel-group trial with an integrated economic evaluation. A central web-based system used computer-generated tables to allocate treatments. A cost-utility analysis based on visual acuity was conducted and a 10-year extrapolation by Markov modelling was also carried out.

SETTING

The setting was tertiary care centres throughout the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 2-18 years inclusive, with persistently active JIA-associated uveitis (despite optimised MTX treatment for at least 12 weeks).

INTERVENTIONS

All participants received a stable dose of MTX and either adalimumab (20 mg/0.8 ml for patients weighing < 30 kg or 40 mg/0.8 ml for patients weighing ≥ 30 kg by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks based on body weight) or a placebo (0.8 ml as appropriate according to body weight by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks) for up to 18 months. A follow-up appointment was arranged at 6 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome - time to treatment failure [multicomponent score as defined by set criteria based on the Standardisation of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) criteria]. Economic outcome - incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from the perspective of the NHS in England and Personal Social Services providers. Full details of secondary outcomes are provided in the study protocol.

RESULTS

A total of 90 participants were randomised (adalimumab, n = 60; placebo, n = 30). There were 14 (23%) treatment failures in the adalimumab group and 17 (57%) in the placebo group. The analysis of the data from the double-blind phase of the trial showed that the hazard risk (HR) of treatment failure was significantly reduced, by 75%, for participants in the adalimumab group (HR 0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.51; p < 0.0001 from log-rank test). The cost-effectiveness of adalimumab plus MTX was £129,025 per QALY gained. Adalimumab-treated participants had a much higher incidence of adverse and serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab in combination with MTX is safe and effective in the management of JIA-associated uveitis. However, the likelihood of cost-effectiveness is < 1% at the £30,000-per-QALY threshold.

FUTURE WORK

A clinical trial is required to define the most effective time to stop therapy. Prognostic biomarkers of early and complete response should also be identified.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10065623 and European Clinical Trials Database number 2010-021141-41.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This trial was also funded by Arthritis Research UK (grant reference number 19612). Two strengths of adalimumab (20 mg/0.8 ml and 40 mg/0.8 ml) and a matching placebo were manufactured by AbbVie Inc. (the Marketing Authorisation holder) and supplied in bulk to the contracted distributor (Sharp Clinical Services, Crickhowell, UK) for distribution to trial centres.

Health State Utility Values in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: What is the Evidence?

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this systematic review were to identify health state utility values (HSUV) of children and adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the literature and to assess whether HSUV were appropriately reported and could be used to inform parameter inputs for a model-based cost-utility analysis to inform decision making.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, EconLit and CINAHL databases were searched in July 2019. Inclusion criteria were studies using preference-based instruments, targeting children or adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and in the English language. The quality of studies was assessed using a modified checklist that included relevant sources of bias and assessment of quality of HSUV valuation and measurement. A descriptive analysis was conducted, including assessment on reporting of population characteristics and stratification of HSUV by potential health states or population subgroup.

RESULTS

From 620 identified articles, ten reported HSUV. Seven studies reported HSUV of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and three of adults with a history of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Population disease activity status and drug treatment were reported in less than half of the studies. Six (out of ten) studies stratified HSUV results for at least one of the potential health state categories, but they represent very specific situations or interventions (e.g. patients receiving different types of physiotherapy or treated with etanercept over time).

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified critical gaps in the literature reporting HSUV in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis including a lack of HSUV measures for distinct health states, particularly in adults with a history of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. The current reported HSUV data in juvenile idiopathic arthritis are insufficient for a full cost-utility analysis with a short or lifetime horizon.

Health utility estimation in children and adolescents: a review of health technology assessments

Objective: Health utility estimates for children and adolescents are critical for cost-utility analyses informing health technology assessment (HTA) authorities' decisions governing access to pediatric treatments. However, in a recent review, only 29% of published pediatric cost-utility models used a utility measure validated for children. We examined utility estimates used in pediatric HTAs.Methods: A targeted review of pediatric HTAs was performed, focusing on agencies reporting utility estimate sources and methods.Results: Searches identified 11 HTAs in pediatric indications and five in mixed populations with separate analyses for adults and children. Among 13 appraisals reporting methodological detail, five used pediatric utility estimates (based on the Health Utilities Index [HUI], n = 3; Atopic Dermatitis Quality of Life [ADQoL], n = 1; or mapping, n = 1). Issues were identified with mapping, use of adult data for some health states, and assumptions about ADQoL responses. In the remaining eight appraisals, adult utility estimates were applied. Caregiver utility was included in two of 16 appraisals.Conclusions: Only 38% of pediatric HTAs reviewed used pediatric utility estimates, and HTA authorities raised concerns about these data in many cases; only 12% of HTAs included caregiver utility. Although several preference-based utility measures are available for pediatric populations, limited data and guidance on selection of measures are available. When estimating pediatric utility weights, alternative measures should be reviewed for suitability given the model population and health condition. Pediatric and adult utility estimates should be applied appropriately as patients age over time, and caregiver and/or family member utility should be included, where relevant. Gaps exist in utility measures for children aged <4 years and caregivers.

Reduction in the utilization of prednisone or methotrexate in Canadian claims data following initiation of etanercept in pediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

In adult patients with arthritis, use of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor etanercept (ETN) is often associated with a reduction in the utilization of co-medications, particularly steroids. Comparatively little is known about the utilization of co-medications when ETN is initiated in pediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).

METHODS

This study analyzed Canadian longitudinal claims level data spanning January 2007 to April 2017. Data were collated from the IQVIA Private Drug Plan, Ontario Public Drug Plan, and the Quebec Public Drug Plan (Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec) databases. Patients < 18 years of age were indexed when filling a prescription for ETN between January 2008 and January 2016. Those who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were assessed for methotrexate (MTX), and prednisone (PRD) use in the 6 months prior to and 12 months following initiation of ETN.

RESULTS

Longitudinal claims data for 330 biologic-naive pediatric patients initiating ETN therapy were included. The majority of patients were female (67%), aged 10-17 years (64%), and with a drug history consistent with JIA (96%). Most patients were from Quebec (36%) or Ontario (33%). Dosing of ETN was weight-based with a mean dosage over the first year of 31 mg per week. ETN dosing was relatively consistent over the first year. In total, 222 (67%) patients did not use MTX and 223 (68%) did not use PRD before or after starting ETN. A total of 17% (18/103) of MTX-treated and 50% (46/92) of PRD-treated patients discontinued use of those medications upon initiation of ETN treatment. In patients continuing MTX or PRD, significant reductions in the weekly dosage from 14.3 to 6.8 mg per week for MTX and from 56 to 23 mg per week for PRD were observed (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study of Canadian claims-level data is the first large prespecified analysis of co-medication utilization following the initiation of ETN therapy in pediatric patients. A decline in both MTX and PRD use and dosage was observed and may be associated with benefits related to safety, tolerability, and overall healthcare costs.

Seeking the state of the art in standardized measurement of health care resource use and costs in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

This study aims to describe current practice in identifying and measuring health care resource use and unit costs in economic evaluations or costing studies of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted (in July 2018) in PubMed and Embase to identify economic evaluations, costing studies, or resource utilization studies focusing on patients with JIA. Only English language peer-reviewed articles reporting primary research were included. Data from all included full-text articles were extracted and analysed to identify the reported health care resource use items. In addition, the data sources used to obtain these resource use and unit costs were identified for all included articles.

RESULTS

Of 1176 unique citations identified by the search, 20 full-text articles were included. These involved 4 full economic evaluations, 5 cost-outcome descriptions, 8 cost descriptions, and 3 articles reporting only resource use. The most commonly reported health care resource use items involved medication (80%), outpatient and inpatient hospital visits (80%), laboratory tests (70%), medical professional visits (70%) and other medical visits (65%). Productivity losses of caregivers were much more often incorporated than (future) productivity losses of patients (i.e. 55% vs. 15%). Family borne costs were not commonly captured (ranging from 15% for school costs to 50% for transportation costs). Resource use was mostly obtained from family self-reported questionnaires. Estimates of unit costs were mostly based on reimbursement claims, administrative data, or literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some consistency in commonly included health care resource use items, variability remains in including productivity losses, missed school days and family borne costs. As these items likely substantially influence the full cost impact of JIA, the heterogeneity found between the items reported in the included studies limits the comparability of the results. Therefore, standardization of resource use items and unit costs to be collected is required. This standardization will provide guidance to future research and thereby improve the quality and comparability of economic evaluations or costing studies in JIA and potentially other childhood diseases. This would allow better understanding of the burden of JIA, and to estimate how it varies across health care systems.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept and tocilizumab for treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is characterised by joint pain, swelling and a limitation of movement caused by inflammation. Subsequent joint damage can lead to disability and growth restriction. Treatment commonly includes disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), such as methotrexate. Clinical practice now favours newer drugs termed biologic DMARDs where indicated.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of four biologic DMARDs [etanercept (Enbrel(®), Pfizer), abatacept (Orencia(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), adalimumab (Humira(®), AbbVie) and tocilizumab (RoActemra(®), Roche) - with or without methotrexate where indicated] for the treatment of JIA (systemic or oligoarticular JIA are excluded).

DATA SOURCES

Electronic bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for published studies from inception to May 2015 for English-language articles. Bibliographies of related papers, systematic reviews and company submissions were screened and experts were contacted to identify additional evidence.

REVIEW METHODS

Systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness were undertaken in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. A cost-utility decision-analytic model was developed to compare the estimated cost-effectiveness of biologic DMARDs versus methotrexate. The base-case time horizon was 30 years and the model took a NHS perspective, with costs and benefits discounted at 3.5%.

RESULTS

Four placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria for the clinical effectiveness review (one RCT evaluating each biologic DMARD). Only one RCT included UK participants. Participants had to achieve an American College of Rheumatology Pediatric (ACR Pedi)-30 response to open-label lead-in treatment in order to be randomised. An exploratory adjusted indirect comparison suggests that the four biologic DMARDs are similar, with fewer disease flares and greater proportions of ACR Pedi-50 and -70 responses among participants randomised to continued biologic DMARDs. However, confidence intervals were wide, the number of trials was low and there was clinical heterogeneity between trials. Open-label extensions of the trials showed that, generally, ACR responses remained constant or even increased after the double-blind phase. The proportions of adverse events and serious adverse events were generally similar between the treatment and placebo groups. Four economic evaluations of biologic DMARDs for patients with JIA were identified but all had limitations. Two quality-of-life studies were included, one of which informed the cost-utility model. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for adalimumab, etanercept and tocilizumab versus methotrexate were £38,127, £32,526 and £38,656 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), respectively. The ICER for abatacept versus methotrexate as a second-line biologic was £39,536 per QALY.

LIMITATIONS

The model does not incorporate the natural history of JIA in terms of long-term disease progression, as the current evidence is limited. There are no head-to-head trials of biologic DMARDs, and clinical evidence for specific JIA subtypes is limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Biologic DMARDs are superior to placebo (with methotrexate where permitted) in children with (predominantly) polyarticular course JIA who have had an insufficient response to previous treatment. Randomised comparisons of biologic DMARDs with long-term efficacy and safety follow-up are needed to establish comparative effectiveness. RCTs for JIA subtypes for which evidence is lacking are also required.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015016459.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

The humanistic and economic burden of juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the era of biologic medication

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a poorly understood, heterogeneous, incurable, inflammatory syndrome. Long-term outcomes are uncertain, and this painful condition can result in lifelong disability. JIA is associated with considerable financial and humanistic burden for those affected and the healthcare system. Early diagnosis and effective treatment are indicated to optimise outcomes. Modern treatment aims to achieve remission and preserve joint function by using disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) early. DMARDs can be classified as conventional/traditional or biologic. Biologic medications may be more effective but cost approximately ten times more than traditional DMARDs. Decision-makers in healthcare are increasingly comparing the cost and consequences of alternative treatment strategies to guide resource allocation decisions. There have been few economic evaluations to date to guide medicines optimisation in JIA. This systematic review highlights the lack of existing evidence relating to the humanistic and economic burden of JIA in the era of biologic medication.

[Evidence of treatment of chronic inflammation in childhood and adolescence with biologics]

BACKGROUND

Biologics, usually monoclonal antibodies or fusion proteins, are thought to specifically interfere with immunopathogenesis of chronic inflammatory diseases. In order to test these substances also in children and adolescents, financial incentives for manufacturers were created and classification of chronic inflammatory diseases and definition of disease activity, improvement, relapse and remission were established and large international research cooperation projects were founded.

METHODS

A selective literature search was carried out for treatment of chronic inflammatory diseases in children and adolescents with biologics including current guidelines.

RESULTS

Only 7 out of 18 prescribed biologics have been approved for children and mostly within narrow limits. The evidence for efficacy is based on four randomized double blind placebo-controlled studies, seven withdrawal studies and seven observational studies. In spite of the limited evidence in comparison to their use in adult patients these substances are broadly used worldwide and have enlarged and substantially improved the therapeutic choices in children when conventional treatment failed or proved to be toxic. Severe adverse events including infections occasionally occur (0.01-0.03 events per patient year) but the rate of malignancies is not obviously increased; however, only two thirds of patients respond to treatment. Improvement is often incomplete, some patients deteriorate and definite termination of drug treatment is possible in only a few patients.

CONCLUSION

As the prescription of biologics has become an important issue of treatment but is based on insufficient evidence data, further studies are necessary in children and adolescents with diseases, such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis and inherited fever syndromes. As many drugs are available these studies can be conducted against verum.

Outcomes research in childhood autoimmune diseases

This article provides an introduction to key aspects of outcomes research in pediatric rheumatology, focusing on arthritis. Patient-centered outcomes research addresses questions of interest to multiple stakeholders in order to guide the best health care decisions suited to a particular patient's circumstances and preferences. Discussion includes the importance of maintaining high-quality longitudinal patient registries and use of valid clinical and patient-reported outcome measures. Rapid, reliable translation of research on best practices into clinical care, as facilitated by quality improvement learning networks, leads to timely and meaningful improvement in patient outcomes.

Cost of biologics in the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a factor not to be overlooked

Biologics are a promising treatment option for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) but drug costs are very high compared to conventional treatment. From a socioeconomic view the additional costs of new interventions should be weighed against their incremental health benefits compared to standard care. Therefore we evaluated data on cost-effectiveness of biologics in JIA. We searched Medline, Embase, and The York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database for relevant literature. Current data show that biologics are reducing direct and indirect healthcare costs if one excludes the costs of the drug itself. The costs of biologics are more than ten times as high as conventional drug treatment. As a result of limited data, no comparison on cost-effectiveness between biologics could be performed. Although data on long-term cost-effectiveness of biologics are lacking, the expectation is that they will be cost-effective in the long-term. The idea behind this is that biologic treatment should be administered to patients that without these drugs would incur high direct and indirect costs due to continuous severe disease resulting in irreversible disabilities. In our opinion the best cost benefit could be gained if these patients receive biologic treatment introduced early in the disease. This is in order to minimize irreversible damage to the joints and minimize need for long-term biologic therapy by early suppression of the disease. To support these hypotheses future research is needed on long-term cost-effectiveness of all biologics used in JIA.