Cost-utility analysis of oral deferasirox versus infusional deferoxamine in transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia patients

A Systematic Review on Economic Evaluation Studies of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Interventions in the Middle East and North Africa

INTRODUCTION

Due to the increase in healthcare budget constraint, economic evaluation (EE) evidence is increasingly required to inform resource allocation decisions. This study aimed to systematically review quantity, characteristics, and quality of full EE studies on diagnostic and therapeutic interventions conducted in 26 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus databases were comprehensively searched to identify the published EE studies in the MENA region. The quality of reviewed studies was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

The search identified 69 studies. The cost-utility approach was adopted in 49 studies (71 %). More than half (38 studies; 55 %) were conducted in Iran and Turkey. Sixteen countries (62 %) did not have any EE studies. The most frequently analyzed therapeutic areas were infectious diseases (19 studies; 28 %), cardiovascular diseases (11 studies; 16 %), and malignancies (10 studies; 14 %). Ten studies (14 %), 46 (67 %), 12 (17 %), and 1 study (1 %) were classified as excellent, high, moderate, and poor quality, respectively. The mean of items reported was 85.10 % (standard deviation 13.32 %). Characterizing heterogeneity, measurement of effectiveness, time horizon, and discount rate were missed in 21 (60 %), 22 (32 %), 20 (29 %) and 15 (25 %) studies, respectively. Data on effectiveness and utility relied primarily on studies conducted outside the region.

CONCLUSIONS

The quantity of EE studies in the MENA region remains low; however, overall quality is high to excellent. The availability of local data, capacity building, and national guidelines are vital to improve both the quantity and quality of EE studies in the region.

QALY league table of Iran: a practical method for better resource allocation

BACKGROUND

The limited health care resources cannot meet all the demands of the society. Thus, decision makers have to choose feasible interventions and reject the others. We aimed to collect and summarize the results of all cost utility analysis studies that were conducted in Iran and develop a Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) league table.

METHODS

A systematic mapping review was conducted to identify all cost utility analysis studies done in Iran and then map them in a table. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science, as well as Iranian databases like Iran Medex, SID, Magiran, and Barakat Knowledge Network System were all searched for articles published from the inception of the databases to January 2020. Additionally, Cost per QALY or Incremental Cost Utility Ratio (ICUR) were collected from all studies. The Joanna Briggs checklist was used to assess quality appraisal.

RESULTS

In total, 51 cost-utility studies were included in the final analysis, out of which 14 studies were on cancer, six studies on coronary heart diseases. Two studies, each on hemophilia, multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis. The rest were on various other diseases. Markov model was the commonest one which has been applied to in 45% of the reviewed studies. Discount rates ranged from zero to 7.2%. The cost per QALY ranged from $ 0.144 in radiography costs for patients with some orthopedic problems to $ 4,551,521 for immune tolerance induction (ITI) therapy in hemophilia patients. High heterogeneity was revealed; therefore, it would be biased to rank interventions based on reported cost per QALY or ICUR.

CONCLUSIONS

However, it is instructive and informative to collect all economic evaluation studies and summarize them in a table. The information on the table would in turn be used to redirect resources for efficient allocation. in general, it was revealed that preventive programs are cost effective interventions from different perspectives in Iran.

Economic Evaluation of Severe Anaemia: Review-Based Recommendations and a Conceptual Framework

Objective: Novel anaemia treatments have greatly improved patient outcomes in the last decade and have also undergone economic evaluations in various settings using heterogenous model structures, costs, and inputs. The objectives were to review published economic evaluation studies in major red blood cell disorders, identify limitations in the applied methodology, provide a set of recommendations, and produce a conceptual framework for future economic research in this disease area. Methods: A targeted search was conducted for economic literature evaluating treatments in major red blood cell disorders related to anaemia. Disorders included autoimmune haemolytic anaemia, β-thalassaemia, chemotherapy-induced anaemia, anaemia in chronic kidney disease, and severe aplastic anaemia. Budget impact models and cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were considered. Modelling assumptions regarding the model structure, time horizon, perspective, and type of costs were reviewed and recommendations and a conceptual framework for future economic analyses were created. Results: A total of four budget impact models, nine cost-utility analyses, and four cost-effectiveness analyses were investigated. A major limitation was that the included costs varied significantly across studies. Costs which were rarely included, and generally should be considered, were related to adverse events, mortality, and productivity. Additionally, relationships between levels of serum ferritin, hepatic or total body iron, and haemoglobin with long-term complications and mortality were rarely included. Conclusion: Published economic analyses evaluating treatments for major red blood cell disorders frequently exclude vital costs. A set of recommendations and a conceptual framework will aid researchers in applying a more comprehensive approach for economic evaluations in major red blood cell disorders.

Cost-utility of new film-coated tablet formulation of deferasirox vs deferoxamine among major beta-thalassemia patients in Iran

OBJECTIVES

Thalassemia is a hereditary disease, which caused economic burden in developing countries. This study evaluated the cost utility of new formulation of deferasirox (Jadenu) vs deferoxamine (Desferal) among B-Thalassemia-major patients from payer perspective in Iran.

METHODS

An economic-evaluation through Markov model was performed. A systematic review was conducted in order to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of comparators. Because of chelating therapy is weight-dependent, patients were assumed to be 2 years-old at initiation in first and 18 years-old in second scenario, and model was estimated lifetime costs and utilities. Costs were calculated to the Iran healthcare system through payer perspective and measured effectiveness using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). One-way sensitivity analysis and budget impact analysis was also employed.

RESULTS

The 381 studies were retrieved from systematic searching through databases. After eliminating duplicate and irrelevant studies, 2 studies selected for evaluating the effectiveness. Jadenu was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 1470.6 and 2544.7 US$ vs Desferal in first and second scenario respectively. The estimated ICER for Jadenu compared to generic deferoxamine was 2837.0 and 6924.1 US$ for first and second scenario respectively. For all scenarios Jadenu is presumed as cost-effective option based on calculated ICER which was lower than 1 gross domestic product per capita in Iran. Sensitivity analysis showed that different parameters except discount rate and indirect cost did not have impact on results. Based on budget impact analysis the estimated cost for patients using Desferal (based on the market share of brand) was 44,021,478 US$ in 3 years vs 42,452,606 US$ in replacing 33% of brand market share with Jadenu. This replacement corresponded to the cost saving of almost 1,568,872 US$ for the payers in 3 years. The calculated cost of using generic deferoxamine in all patients was 68,948,392 US$. The increase in the cost of using Jadenu for 10% of all patients in this scenario would be 934,427 US$ (1.36%) US$ at the first year.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this analysis, film-coated deferasirox appeared to be cost-effective treatment in comparison with Desferal for managing child and adult chronic iron overload in B-thalassemia major patients of Iran.

Health state utilities associated with treatment for transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia

OBJECTIVES

Transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia (TDT) is a genetic disease that affects production of red blood cells. Conventional treatment involves regular red blood cell transfusions and iron chelation, which has a substantial impact on quality of life. While potentially curative, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is associated with risk of complications, including graft-versus-host disease (GvHD). Gene addition therapy, a novel treatment approach, involves autologous transplantation of the patient's own genetically modified hematopoietic stem cells. The purpose of this study was to estimate utilities associated with treatment approaches for TDT.

METHODS

General population respondents in England valued eight health state vignettes (developed with clinician, patient, and parent input) in time trade-off interviews.

RESULTS

A total of 207 participants completed interviews (49.8% female; mean age = 43.2 years). Mean (SD) utilities for the pre-transplant health states were 0.73 (0.25) with oral chelation and 0.63 (0.32) with subcutaneous chelation. Mean utilities for the transplant year were 0.62 (0.35) for gene addition therapy, 0.47 (0.39) for allo-HSCT, and 0.39 (0.39) for allo-HSCT with acute GvHD. Post-transplant utilities were 0.93 (0.15) for transfusion independent, 0.75 (0.25) for 60% transfusion reduction, and 0.51 (0.38) for chronic GvHD. Acute and chronic GvHD were associated with significant disutility (acute = - 0.09, p < 0.0001; chronic = - 0.42, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Utilities followed expected patterns, with logical differences between treatment options for TDT and substantially greater utility for transfusion independence than for ongoing treatment involving transfusion and chelation. These utilities may be useful in cost-utility models estimating the value of treatments for TDT.

Evaluation of Efficacy, Safety, and Satisfaction Taking Deferasirox Twice Daily Versus Once Daily in Patients With Transfusion-Dependent Thalassemia

OBJECTIVE

Deferasirox is a once-daily oral iron-chelation agent approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in November 2005. The authors aimed to evaluate efficacy, safety, and satisfaction of patients regarding twice-daily dose of deferasirox in patients with thalassemia who are resistant to once-daily regimen.

METHODS

In this historical cohort multicenter study, 34 patients with beta-thalassemia major resistant or intolerant to once-daily dose of deferasirox (35 mg/kg/d) were investigated in 2016. Patients were registered at 3 thalassemia referral centers in Shiraz, southern Iran and Tehran, the capital of Iran. All patients were followed for 1 year and monitored by regular physical examination, laboratory data, serum ferritin levels, and heart and liver T2 magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

Mean age of thalassemia patients was 25.6±8.1 (8 to 40) years, including 22 female individuals and 12 male individuals. Serum ferritin levels significantly decreased during the study period (2021±955 at baseline vs. 1228±894 at the end of the study, P<0.001). Liver T2 magnetic resonance imaging of the patients demonstrated a significant improvement during the study. 73.3% of patients showed normal values at the end of study compared with 28.1% at the baseline (P<0.001). Drug side effects were reported only in 2 patients (5.8%) including 1 patient with abdominal pain and 1 with leukopenia and thrombocytopenia.

CONCLUSIONS

It seems that deferasirox can be used with increased dose and twice daily with acceptable efficacy in unresponsive or intolerant thalassemia patients to once-daily dose. Close monitoring of the patients is necessary to detect and manage any possible adverse events.

Challenges of blood transfusions in β-thalassemia

Patients with β-thalassemia major (BTM) require regular blood transfusions, supported by appropriate iron chelation therapy (ICT), throughout their life. β-thalassemia is a global disease that is most highly prevalent in Southeast Asia, Africa, and Mediterranean countries. However, the global distribution of patients with β-thalassemia is changing due to population migration, and Northern European countries now have significant thalassemia populations. Globally, many patients with BTM have limited access to regular and safe blood transfusions. A lack of voluntary nonremunerated blood donors, poor awareness of thalassemia, a lack of national blood policies, and fragmented blood services contribute to a significant gap between the timely supply of, and demand for, safe blood. In many centers, there is inadequate provision of antigen testing, even for common red cell antigens such as CcEe and Kell. Policies to raise awareness and increase the use of red blood cell antigen testing and requesting of compatible blood in transfusion centers are needed to reduce alloimmunization (the development of antibodies to red blood cell antigens), which limits the effectiveness of transfusions and the potential availability of blood. Patients with BTM are also at risk of transfusion-transmitted infections unless appropriate blood screening and safety practices are in place. Hence, many patients are not transfused or are undertransfused, resulting in decreased health and quality-of-life outcomes. Hemovigilance, leukoreduction, and the ability to thoroughly investigate transfusion reactions are often lacking, especially in resource-poor countries. ICT is essential to prevent cardiac failure and other complications due to iron accumulation. Despite the availability of potentially inexpensive oral ICT, a high proportion of patients suffer complications of iron overload and die each year due to a lack of, or inadequate, ICT. Increased awareness, training, and resources are required to improve and standardize adequate blood transfusion services and ICT among the worldwide population of patients with BTM. ICT needs to be available, affordable, and correctly prescribed. Effective, safe, and affordable new treatments that reduce the blood transfusion burden in patients with β-thalassemia remain an unmet need.

Economic Evaluation of Chelation Regimens for β-Thalassemia Major: a Systematic Review

Background

Deferoxamine (DFO) or Deferiprone (DFP) or Deferasirox (DFX) monotherapy and DFO and DFP combination therapy (DFO+DFP) were four commonly implemented now chelation regimens for the iron overloaded of β-thalassemia major. This systematic review aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of four chelation regimens and provide evidence for the rational use of chelation regimens for β-thalassemia major therapy in the clinic.

Methods

A systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China Biology Medicine, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Data, and WanFang Data was conducted in April 2018. In addition, a manual search was performed. Two researchers, working independently, selected the papers, extracted the data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included documents. Each included paper was evaluated using a checklist developed by Drummond et al.

Results

The number of records was initially 968, and eight papers met the final eligibility criteria. All the included eight papers were cost-utility analyses, and their methodological quality was fair. In these eight papers, nineteen studies were present. Nine studies of DFX versus DFO had contradictory results. Out of the nineteen studies, three studies of DFX versus DFP established that using DFP was cost-effective. Three studies of DFP versus DFO proved that using DFP was cost-effective. One survey of DFO+DFP versus DFO found that using DFO was cost-effective. One study of DFO+DFP versus DFP found that using DFP was cost-effective. Moreover, there were two studies of DFO+DFP versus DFX, but we cannot be sure which one of two chelation regimens was cost-effective.

Conclusion

In brief, DFP is cost-effective, followed by DFO or DFX, when an iron chelator is to be used alone for β-thalassemia iron overload treatment. All studies that compared DFO+DFP with DFO (or DFP) monotherapy established that the DFO+DFP was not cost-effective. Existing studies about DFO+DFP versus DFX could not prove which one of two chelation regimens was cost-effective. However, due to the low number of DFO+DFP versus DFO (or DFP or DFX) monotherapy studies, more extensive, high-quality research is required for further analysis and confirmation of our findings. Moreover, the cost-effectiveness is not an absolute issue when in different countries (regions) the results are opposite for other countries (regions). As a result, the local/national context had a substantial influence on the results of the pharmacoeconomic evaluation.

Blood transfusion versus hydroxyurea in beta-thalassemia in Iran: a cost-effectiveness study

INTRODUCTION

Thalassemia intermedia is a type of anemia which has several treatments modalities. We aimed to study the cost effectiveness of two treatments, including blood transfusion and hydroxyurea, in patients with beta-thalassemia intermedia in south of Iran referred to a referral center affiliated to Iran, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in 2015.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a cost-effectiveness study which was conducted on 122 patients with beta-thalassemia intermedia. The indicator of effectiveness in this study was the reduction of growth disorder (normal BMI). Data analysis was done using SPSS 21, Excel 2010 and Treeage 2011. Finally, the one-way sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

The average annual costs of blood transfusion and the use of hydroxyurea in 2015 were 20733.27 purchasing power parity (PPP)$ and 7040.29 PPP$, respectively. The effectiveness of blood transfusion was57.4% while in hydroxyurea group was 60.7%.

CONCLUSION

The results showed that the cost effectiveness of using hydroxyurea was more than that of blood transfusion. Therefore, it is recommended that the use of hydroxyurea in the treatment of patients with beta-thalassemia intermedia would become the first priority, and more basic and supplementary insurance coverage for treating such patients using hydroxyurea should be considered.

Comparison of Blood Transfusion Plus Chelation Therapy and Bone Marrow Transplantation in Patients with β-Thalassemia: Application of SF-36, EQ-5D, and Visual Analogue Scale Measures

BACKGROUND

β-Thalassemia is a prevalent genetic disease in Mediterranean countries. The most common treatments for this disease are blood transfusion plus iron chelation (BTIC) therapy and bone marrow transplantation (BMT). Patients using these procedures experience different health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The purpose of the present study was to measure HRQoL in these patients using 2 different multiattribute quality of life (QoL) scales.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, data were gathered using 3 instruments: a socio-demographic questionnaire, EQ-5D, and SF-36. A total of 196 patients with β-thalassemia were randomly selected from 2 hospitals in Shiraz (Southern Iran). Data were analyzed using logistic regression and multiple regression models to identify factors that affect the patients' HRQoL.

RESULTS

The average EQ-5D index and EQ visual analog scale (VAS) scores were 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89) and 71.85 (95% CI: 69.13-74.58), respectively. Patients with BMT reported significantly higher EQ VAS scores (83.27 vs 68.55, respectively). The results showed that patients who lived in rural area and patients with BMT reported higher EQ VAS scores (rural; β= 10.25, P = .006 and BMT; β= 11.88, P = .000). As well, SF-36 between 2 groups of patients were statistically significant in physical component scale (PCS).

CONCLUSION

Patients in the BMT group experienced higher HRQoL in both physical and mental aspects compared to those in the BTIC group. More studies are needed to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of these methods in developing countries.

Cost-utility of chelators in transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia major patients: a review of the pharmacoeconomic literature

In the inherited hematologic disorder β-thalassemia major, patients receive regular, lifelong blood transfusions, which carry excess iron that the body is unable to eliminate. Chelation therapy (deferoxamine, deferiprone, deferasirox or deferoxamine-deferiprone combination) is required to reduce iron accumulation in target organs and the associated morbidity and mortality. Each chelation regimen has a distinct safety/efficacy profile and particular costs associated with its use. This review aims to provide an overview of published cost-utility analyses of currently used chelation regimens, and to comment on the potential relevance of their findings in the USA market, where deferiprone has recently been introduced.

Desferrioxamine mesylate for managing transfusional iron overload in people with transfusion-dependent thalassaemia

BACKGROUND

Thalassaemia major is a genetic disease characterised by a reduced ability to produce haemoglobin. Management of the resulting anaemia is through red blood cell transfusions.Repeated transfusions result in an excessive accumulation of iron in the body (iron overload), removal of which is achieved through iron chelation therapy. Desferrioxamine mesylate (desferrioxamine) is one of the most widely used iron chelators. Substantial data have shown the beneficial effects of desferrioxamine, although adherence to desferrioxamine therapy is a challenge. Alternative oral iron chelators, deferiprone and deferasirox, are now commonly used. Important questions exist about whether desferrioxamine, as monotherapy or in combination with an oral iron chelator, is the best treatment for iron chelation therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness (dose and method of administration) of desferrioxamine in people with transfusion-dependent thalassaemia.To summarise data from trials on the clinical efficacy and safety of desferrioxamine for thalassaemia and to compare these with deferiprone and deferasirox.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register. We also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), LILACS and other international medical databases, plus ongoing trials registers and the Transfusion Evidence Library (www.transfusionevidencelibrary.com). All searches were updated to 5 March 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing desferrioxamine with placebo, with another iron chelator, or comparing two schedules or doses of desferrioxamine, in people with transfusion-dependent thalassaemia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Six authors working independently were involved in trial quality assessment and data extraction. For one trial, investigators supplied additional data upon request.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 22 trials involving 2187 participants (range 11 to 586 people) were included. These trials included eight comparisons between desferrioxamine alone and deferiprone alone; five comparisons between desferrioxamine combined with deferiprone and deferiprone alone; eight comparisons between desferrioxamine alone and desferrioxamine combined with deferiprone; two comparisons of desferrioxamine with deferasirox; and two comparisons of different routes of desferrioxamine administration (bolus versus continuous infusion). Overall, few trials measured the same or long-term outcomes. Seven trials reported cardiac function or liver fibrosis as measures of end organ damage; none of these included a comparison with deferasirox.Five trials reported a total of seven deaths; three in patients who received desferrioxamine alone, two in patients who received desferrioxamine and deferiprone. A further death occurred in a patient who received deferiprone in another who received deferasirox alone. One trial reported five further deaths in patients who withdrew from randomised treatment (deferiprone with or without desferrioxamine) and switched to desferrioxamine alone.One trial planned five years of follow up but was stopped early due to the beneficial effects of a reduction in serum ferritin levels in those receiving combined desferrioxamine and deferiprone treatment compared with deferiprone alone. The results of this and three other trials suggest an advantage of combined therapy with desferrioxamine and deferiprone over monotherapy to reduce iron stores as measured by serum ferritin. There is, however, no evidence for the improved efficacy of combined desferrioxamine and deferiprone therapy against monotherapy from direct or indirect measures of liver iron.Earlier trials measuring the cardiac iron load indirectly by measurement of the magnetic resonance imaging T2* signal had suggested deferiprone may reduce cardiac iron more quickly than desferrioxamine. However, meta-analysis of two trials showed a significantly lower left ventricular ejection fraction in patients who received desferrioxamine alone compared with those who received combination therapy using desferrioxamine with deferiprone.Adverse events were recorded by 18 trials. These occurred with all treatments, but were significantly less likely with desferrioxamine than deferiprone in one trial, relative risk 0.45 (95% confidence interval 0.24 to 0.84) and significantly less likely with desferrioxamine alone than desferrioxamine combined with deferiprone in two other trials, relative risk 0.33 (95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.84). In particular, four studies reported permanent treatment withdrawal due to adverse events from deferiprone; only one of these reported permanent withdrawals associated with desferrioxamine. Adverse events also occurred at a higher frequency in patients who received deferasirox than desferrioxamine in one trial. Eight trials reported local adverse reactions at the site of desferrioxamine infusion including pain and swelling. Adverse events associated with deferiprone included joint pain, gastrointestinal disturbance, increases in liver enzymes and neutropenia; adverse events associated with deferasirox comprised increases in liver enzymes and renal impairment. Regular monitoring of white cell counts has been recommended for deferiprone and monitoring of liver and renal function for deferasirox.In summary, desferrioxamine and the oral iron chelators deferiprone and deferasirox produce significant reductions in iron stores in transfusion-dependent, iron-overloaded people. There is no evidence from randomised clinical trials to suggest that any one of these has a greater reduction of clinically significant end organ damage, although in two trials, combination therapy with desferrioxamine and deferiprone showed a greater improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction than desferrioxamine used alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Desferrioxamine is the recommended first-line therapy for iron overload in people with thalassaemia major and deferiprone or deferasirox are indicated for treating iron overload when desferrioxamine is contraindicated or inadequate. Oral deferasirox has been licensed for use in children aged over six years who receive frequent blood transfusions and in children aged two to five years who receive infrequent blood transfusions. In the absence of randomised controlled trials with long-term follow up, there is no compelling evidence to change this conclusion.Worsening iron deposition in the myocardium in patients receiving desferrioxamine alone would suggest a change of therapy by intensification of desferrioxamine treatment or the use of desferrioxamine and deferiprone combination therapy.Adverse events are increased in patients treated with deferiprone compared with desferrioxamine and in patients treated with combined deferiprone and desferrioxamine compared with desferrioxamine alone. People treated with all chelators must be kept under close medical supervision and treatment with deferiprone or deferasirox requires regular monitoring of neutrophil counts or renal function respectively. There is an urgent need for adequately-powered, high-quality trials comparing the overall clinical efficacy and long-term outcomes of deferiprone, deferasirox and desferrioxamine.