Cost and effectiveness of treatments for mild-to-moderate bleeding episodes in haemophilia patients with inhibitors in Korea

Cost-Effectiveness of rFVIIa versus pd-aPCC in the Management of Mild to Moderate Bleeds in Pediatric Patients with Hemophilia A with Inhibitors in Mexico

OBJECTIVE

To compare the costs and clinical consequences of treating mild-to-moderate joint bleeds with recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) versus plasma-derived activated prothrombin complex concentrate (pd-aPCC) in pediatric patients with hemophilia A with inhibitors in Mexico.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness model was developed using TreeAge Pro v14.2.2 software (licensed in the USA) and adapted from a previously published model, with adjustments to reflect local clinical practice. Expert opinion was sought regarding patients' clinical management and resource utilization in Mexico to ensure that the current model was appropriate and relevant. The model compared rFVIIa and pd-aPCC for the treatment of mild-to-moderate joint bleeds in children <14 years old (assumed average weight: 30 kg). The analysis outcome was incremental cost per resolved mild-to-moderate joint bleed. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were used to assess specific assumptions and to address any uncertainty in the model.

RESULTS

The cost of treating mild-to-moderate joint bleeds was lower for rFVIIa versus pd-aPCC after 7 days (MX$105,581 vs. MX$132,024), assuming complete bleed resolution. After 48 hours, rFVIIa was associated with an 8% improvement in bleed resolution versus pd-aPCC, resulting in cost savings of MX$16,754. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that rFVIIa treatment was more cost-effective than pd-aPCC in 67% (at 7 days) and 72% (at 48 hours) of Monte Carlo simulations.

CONCLUSION

Accounting for model uncertainty, rFVIIa provided cost savings over pd-aPCC for the Mexican public health care payer in the management of mild-to-moderate joint bleeds in pediatric hemophilia A with inhibitors.

Cost-utility of a six-month programmed sports therapy (PST) in patients with haemophilia

INTRODUCTION

Recurrent musculoskeletal haemorrhages in people with haemophilia (PwH) lead to restrictions in the locomotor system and, as a result, in physical performance, too. Due to its physical and psychological benefits, sport is increasingly re-commended for haemophilic patients. Evidence on the cost-effectiveness of sports therapy is still lacking.

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of a 6-month programmed sports therapy (PST).

METHODS

The cost-effectiveness of the 6-month PST was assessed from a societal perspective alongside a RCT using cost-utility analysis. The analysis included 50 PwH with moderate-to-severe haemophilia A and B and a training period over 6 months. The health-related quality of life was measured with the EuroQoL-domain questionnaire. Resource utilization was assessed by questionnaire before and after the intervention. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve was constructed, and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

During the 6-month study period, mean adjusted total healthcare costs were lower (mean difference: -22 805 EUR; 95%-CI: -73 944-48 463; P = .59) and the number of QALYs was higher in the intervention group (mean difference: 0.3733; 95%-CI: 0.0014-0.0573; P = .04). The probability of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <50 000 EUR per QALY was 71%. The performed sensitivity analysis confirmed these results.

CONCLUSION

Results showed that the PST is effective in terms of a significant gain of QALYs. Furthermore, results weakly indicate the potential of the PST to reduce healthcare costs. Future studies should expand the observation period to have a closer look at the influence of PST on lifetime costs.

Modern Treatments of Haemophilia: Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses and Future Directions

BACKGROUND

Cost is currently one of the most important aspects in haemophilia care. Factor concentrates absorb more than 90% of healthcare direct costs of haemophilia care, and the debate regarding the high cost of haemophilia treatments and their different use across different countries is increasing.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to review cost-effectiveness analyses conducted on treatment options in haemophilia, focusing on their results and their strengths and limitations; to highlight the possible issues associated with economic evaluations of new treatment options.

METHODS

Electronic searches in PubMed and EMBASE were performed to retrieve papers published between November 2015 and September 2017 to update the previous review of economic evaluations of haemophilia treatments by Drummond et al. Reference lists of included articles and reviews were examined for relevant studies, which were assessed for their quality and their empirical results.

RESULTS

Twenty-six relevant economic analyses were identified; 15 (57.7%) were conducted in patients with haemophilia with inhibitors while 11 (42.3%) involved patients without inhibitors. There were methodological variations among the included studies, and differences in the treatment schemes make a comparative assessment of interventions for patients with haemophilia difficult. Only immune tolerance induction showed consistent results in its cost-saving profile compared with the treatment with bypassing agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations of haemophilia treatments are increasing, but the identification of general cost-effectiveness trends is still difficult in these studies. We are now facing a new era in haemophilia management with a soaring need for high-quality economic evaluations, performed through proactive collaboration between clinical experts, budget holders and health economists.

Strategies for inhibitor treatment and costs in the short and long term: a critical evaluation of recent clinical studies

One important complication of patients with severe haemophilia A is the formation of inhibitory antibodies to factor VIII (FVIII). Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the treatment of choice for patients with inhibitors, but this approach is successful in about 60% of patients. Treatment of acute bleeding in patients with inhibitors is one of the greatest challenges in haemophilia management and is costly. Bypassing agents are the mainstay of treatment in these patients. The aims of this study were to review the most recent publications concerning the costs of inhibitor treatment. We conducted a literature review using PubMed which yielded 63 papers analysing the costs of inhibitor management of which 12 were suitable for our study. Four of eight studies supported the use of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) with lower costs, but the remaining four studies showed that recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) had a lower average treatment cost. Of four ITI studies, two supported lifelong cost-effectiveness of ITI vs. bypassing agents and the remaining two papers showed a high cost of inhibitor treatment. Dosages, time between onset of bleeding and treatment, patient characteristics and the price of drugs are some of the important issues that should be considered for further studies.

Comparison of bypassing agents in bleeding reduction in treatment of bleeding episodes in patients with haemophilia and inhibitors

CONTEXT

Mild-to-moderate bleeding disorders in haemophilia are primarily treated via recombinant activated factor VII a (rFVIIa) or activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC). However, the efficacy of each bypassing agents may vary and none of them is universally effective.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

After reviewing the databases of PubMed, Scopus, MD Consult, Ovid, Trip database, Google Scholar, ProQuest and the Cochrane Library, finally, 17 papers published from 2000 to 2013 were extracted. We used as a random effect model in meta-analysis. Comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA) software was used for calculating and estimating the mean of bleeding reduction and performing meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The mean of bleeding reduction in aPCC and rFVIIa were 71.2% with CI 95% (lower limit 86.8% and upper limit 82%) and 72.3% with CI 95% (lower limit 57.6% and upper limit 83.4%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although differences between the two products were very close to each other, they reported similar effects on joint bleeds. Further clinical studies should be performed by incorporating a standardized measurement in comparative efficacy of aPCC and rFVIIa.

Rituximab for managing acquired hemophilia A in a case of chronic neutrophilic leukemia with the JAK2 kinase V617F mutation

Background

Acquired hemophilia A is rarely found in association with myeloproliferative neoplasms, such as the JAK2 kinase V617F mutation-positive chronic neutrophilic leukemia (CNL).

Case report

An 80-year-old Japanese male was diagnosed with acquired hemophilia A. He had compartment-like symptoms due to soft tissue hemorrhage in his left forearm and right lower extremity. A blood examination showed neutrophilia with a white blood cell count of 31,900/μL (91.9% neutrophils), an activated partial thromboplastin time of 69.0 seconds, coagulation factor VIII (FVIII) < 1.0%, and anti-FVIII inhibitor, 190 BU/mL. The bleeding episodes were controlled with intravenous activated prothrombin complex concentrate (FEIBA^®) followed by recombinant factor VIIa (NovoSeven^®). In addition, oral prednisolone (maximum dose, 30 mg/day) plus four doses of rituximab effectively suppressed anti-FVIII inhibitor levels while simultaneously reducing the neutrophil count. CNL with the JAK2 kinase V617F mutation was identified as the underlying disease.

Conclusion

This report describes the effectiveness of a combination of prednisolone and rituximab in managing acquired hemophilia A in an elderly man with a rare case of JAK2 kinase V617F mutation-positive CNL.

Economical comparison of APCC vs. rFVIIa for mild-to-moderate bleeding episodes in haemophilia patients with inhibitors

To construct a cost-minimization model comparing activated prothrombin complex concentrates (APCC) vs. recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) in haemophilia patients with inhibitors from a US third party payer perspective. A literature-based decision model was used to model inhibitor treatment costs and outcomes. As existing clinical trials fail to demonstrate differences in the relative efficacy or safety of APCC vs. rFVIIa, we assumed the same efficacy for both products in the base-case. Regimens of APCC (75 IU kg⁻¹ × 2 doses) and rFVIIa (90 μg kg⁻¹× 3 doses) were assumed according to manufacturer recommendations. If the first-line treatment failed, patients chose to continue the current treatment or switch to another drug. All costs were adjusted to 2009 US dollars. Sensitivity analyses on the infusion frequency, efficacy, unit price, switch rate, re-bleed rate and body weight were performed to assess model robustness. In the base-case, the total medical cost to treat a bleed with APCC or rFVIIa as first-line medication was US$25,969 and US$35,838, respectively. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that results were insensitive to the efficacy of rFVIIa, unit price of APCC or rFVIIa, switch rate, re-bleed rate or body weight. The rFVIIa will reach cost neutrality when the efficacy of APCC is as low as 60%, or rFVIIa is infused only twice for each line, or APCC is infused three times for each line. Two-way sensitivity analyses showed that results were quite sensitive to the assumed infusion frequency for both products. First-line APCC compared with rFVIIa can be a cost-saving alternative for home treatment of mild-to-moderate bleeds in haemophilia patients with inhibitors.

Systematic literature review of economics analysis on treatment of mild-to-moderate bleeds with aPCC versus rFVIIa

OBJECTIVE

Two bypassing agents, activated prothrombin complex concentrates (aPCC) and recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa), have shown similar efficacy and safety in the treatment of bleeding episodes in patients with hemophilia and inhibitors as demonstrated through the only two head-to-head clinical trials. Given the economic burden of bypassing treatment, it is crucial to have a valid estimate of cost effectiveness of alternative treatments. The aims of this study were to conduct a systematic review of published pharmacoeconomic literature on the cost-effectiveness of aPCC versus rFVIIa to treat mild-to-moderate bleeds in patients with hemophilia and inhibitors, with a focus on the model assumptions and their impact on results.

METHODS

An English language search was conducted for original economic studies comparing aPCC and rFVIIa published between 1995 and July 2010. Detailed information on sponsorship, study design, assumptions and their impact on results was collected for each study.

RESULTS

A total of 11 economic studies were included in the review. Nine studies assessed cost per bleeding episode (eight cost-minimization analysis (CMA) and one cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA)). Two studies were from longitudinal perspective. Studies on cost per bleeding episode were evaluated and systematically compared. All studies were from a third-party payer perspective. Most analyses, except one study, used a similar decision-tree model. The assumptions for all CMA studies were obtained from non-comparable single-armed trials or observational data. All studies were sponsored by the two competing manufacturers of rFVIIa (seven studies) and aPCC (two studies). The crucial parameter assumptions on treatment efficacy and dosing drove their reported findings. Eight of these nine studies favored their sponsor's product.

CONCLUSION

With one exception, published economic studies tend to favor their sponsor's product primarily by assuming a higher efficacy and lower dosing for the sponsored agent, even though the two existing head-to-head clinical studies do not support superior efficacy for either product.