aPCC vs. rFVIIa for the treatment of bleeding in patients with acquired haemophilia - a cost-effectiveness model

Budget impact and cost-utility analysis of prophylactic emicizumab versus on-demand bypassing agents for adolescent severe haemophilia A patients with inhibitors in India

Introduction

Severe Haemophilia A patients with inhibitors are currently being treated with bypassing agents like activated prothrombin complex concentrates (aPCC) and recombinant factor VIIa. Emicizumab is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody, introduced to reduce the bleeding events, improve treatment adherence, and quality of life. However, cost-effectiveness and long-term sustainability of the intervention is not studied in a low middle income setting like India.

Aim

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-utility of Emicizumab compared to traditional bypassing agents in the treatment of severe haemophilia A patients with inhibitors in India. Secondary objective was to analyze the budgetary impact of introducing Emicizumab for this patient population from the perspective of public health system in India.

Methods

Markov model was created to compare the prophylactic emicizumab therapy against bypassing agents for a hypothetical cohort of 10-year-old adolescents in India. The time horizon was 10 years and model built based on health system perspective. Cost utility was expressed as costs per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. All costs were expressed as 2021 US dollars. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to check the robustness of the estimates.

Results

Prophylactic emicizumab was a cost saving intervention with negative Incremental Cost Utility Ratio (ICUR) against recombinant factor VIIa of -853,573 USD (INR -63,109,773), and negative ICUR of -211,675 USD (INR -15,650,403) against APCC. The estimated total budget for treating all the severe Haemophilia A patients with inhibitors in India was USD 59,042,000 (INR 4,365,329,312) for 10 years' time horizon (per patient cost of USD 295,210 [INR 21,826,646.56]).

Conclusion

Prophylactic emicizumab therapy is a cost saving intervention when compared to both the bypassing agents as it is less costly and more effective for severe Haemophilia A patients with inhibitors in India.

Are We Capturing the Socioeconomic Burden of Rare Genetic Disease? A Scoping Review of Economic Evaluations and Cost-of-Illness Studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Rare diseases have a significant impact on patients, families, the health system, and society. Measuring the socioeconomic burden is crucial to valuing interventions for rare diseases. Healthcare system costs are significant, but so are costs to other government sectors, patients, families, and society. To understand the breadth of costs captured in rare disease studies, we examined the cost categories and elements of socioeconomic burden captured in published studies.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted using five electronic databases to identify English language economic evaluations and cost-of-illness studies of interventions for rare diseases (2011-21). We mapped costs using a previously developed evidence-informed framework of socioeconomic burden costs for rare disease.

RESULTS

Of 4890 studies identified, 48 economic evaluations and 22 cost-of-illness studies were included. While 18/22 cost-of-illness studies utilized a societal perspective, only 7/48 economic evaluations incorporated societal costs. Most reported cost categories related to medical costs, with medication and hospitalizations being the most common elements for both study designs. Costs borne by patients, families, and society were reported less among economic evaluations than cost-of-illness studies. These included: productivity (10% vs 77%), travel/accommodation (6% vs 68%), government benefits (4% vs 18%), and family impacts (0% vs 50%).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to cost-of-illness analyses, most of the included economic evaluations did not account for the hidden burden of rare diseases, that is, costs borne by patients, families, and societies. Including these types of costs in future studies would provide a more comprehensive picture of the burden of disease, providing empirical data to inform how we value and make decisions regarding rare disease interventions, health policy, and resource allocation.

Acquired Haemophilia A: An Intriguing Disease

Abstract. Acquired Haemophilia A is a rare acquired bleeding disorder caused by Factor VIII autoantibodies, which neutralise FVIII activity. These inhibitors differ from alloantibodies against FVIII, which can occur in congenital Haemophilia A after repeated exposures to plasma-derived or recombinant FVIII products. In most cases, the disease occurs suddenly in subjects without a personal or familiar history of bleedings, with symptoms that may be mild, moderate, or severe. However, only laboratory alterations are present in ~ 30% of patients. The incidence varies from 1 to 4 cases per million/year; more than 80% of patients are elderly, males and females are similarly affected. There is a small peak of incidence related to pregnancy in young women aged 20–40 years. The disease may be underdiagnosed in the elderly. The diagnostic algorithm is based on an isolated prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time, normal thrombin time, absence of Lupus Anticoagulant, and a mixing test that reveals the presence of an inhibitor: the finding of reduced FVIII activity and the detection of neutralising autoantibodies against FVIII lead to the diagnosis. The disease is idiopathic in 44%–63% of cases, while in the others etiological factors are present. Bleeding prevention and treatment are based on therapeutic tools as by-passing agents, recombinant porcine FVIII concentrate or, in a limited number of cases, FVIII concentrates and desmopressin. As soon as the diagnosis has been made, immunosuppressive therapy must be started to eradicate the inhibitor. Better knowledge of the disease, optimal management of bleeding and eradication of the inhibitor have significantly reduced morbidity and mortality in most patients.

Potential impact of a delayed ADAMTS13 result in the treatment of thrombotic microangiopathy: an economic analysis

BACKGROUND

A pre-plasma exchange ADAMTS13 measurement differentiates thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) from other forms of thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA). Given that many hospitals do not perform the ADAMTS13 assay in-house and that the turnaround time (TAT) differs among reference laboratories, we performed an analysis investigating the potential impact of a delay in obtaining the results on the healthcare system.

METHODS

An economic model was developed to estimate the impact of a delay in obtaining the pretreatment ADAMTS13 results on patients admitted with TMA with cost (US dollars) as the primary outcome. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) as a composite outcome was calculated from both cost and life days [LDs], an effectiveness surrogate marker. Model parameters were gathered from the medical literature, except for the institutional cost of the ADAMTS13 test.

RESULTS

In patients with TMA, during the 6-day study period, the incremental cost to the healthcare system ranged from approximately $4155 to $5123 for every 1-day delay in obtaining the pre-exchange ADAMTS13 results with virtually no change in the effectiveness marker. The ICER composite outcome established the cost-effectiveness of having a fast TAT for pre-exchange ADAMTS13 results. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses also confirmed the robustness of the model.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with clinical presentations of TMAs, having a rapid TAT for pre-exchange ADAMTS13 measurement appeared to be cost-effective. If testing cannot be performed in-house, then our findings support the necessity of contracting with a reference laboratory that can reliably provide the result, preferably within 1 day of admission.

An economic analysis of different treatments for bleeding in patients with acquired haemophilia

BACKGROUND

Acquired haemophilia A (AHA), with potentially high risk of morbidity and mortality, occurs as a result of inhibitors against factor VIII. Bleeding due to AHA can be treated with activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC), recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) or recently, recombinant porcine-sequence factor VIII (rpFVIII). We extended our previous cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) comparing rpFVIII against the available traditional options.

METHODS

For high-titred, haemorrhaging AHA patients treated with either aPCC, rFVIIa or rpFVIII, over the course of 6-days, a Markov simulation was conducted to evaluate the outcomes when these patients transitioned into any of the four following health states: (1) continuous bleeding, (2) thrombosis, (3) stop bleeding and (4) death, with states (2), (3) and (4) modelled as absorbing states. All model parameters were obtained from the medical literature, except the costs of aPCC, rFVIIa and the factor VIII assay, which came from our institutional data.

RESULTS

Excluding the cost of the initial treatment on day 0, the total subsequent treatment cost of rFVIIa was substantially more than the costs of aPCC and rpFVIII ($13 925 vs. $1778 vs. $6957, respectively). The average quality-adjusted life days (QALDs) gained from rpFVIII was lowest (4·89 vs. 4·9 for rFVIIa and 4·91 for aPCC). Overall, aPCC dominated the other two treatments. The model was determined to be robust across the tested ranges for all input variables.

CONCLUSION

Based on this economic model, for AHA patients with high titres who were bleeding, aPCC was the most cost-effective treatment option and may be considered for use if there is no clinical contraindication.