Cost effectiveness of different treatment strategies in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis in china

Sponsorship bias in published pharmacoeconomic evaluations of national reimbursement negotiation drugs in China: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

China's National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL) has become the primary route for drug reimbursement in China. More recently, the authority has made pharmacoeconomic evaluation an integral part of the application for NRDL inclusion. The underlying financial conflict of interests (FCOI) of pharmacoeconomic evaluations, however, has the potential to influence evidence generated and thus subsequent decision-making yet remains poorly understood.

METHODS

We searched for studies published between January 2012 and January 2022 on the 174 drugs added to the 2017-2020 NRDLs after successful negotiation. We categorised the study's FCOI status into no funding, industry funding, non-profit funding and multiple fundings based on authors' disclosure and assessed the reporting quality of included studies using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 checklist. We compiled descriptive statistics of funding types and study outcomes using t-tests and χ2 tests and conducted multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 378 records and our final sample included 92 pharmacoeconomic evaluations, among which 69.6% were conducted with at least one funding source. More than half (57.6%) of the evaluations reached favourable conclusions towards the intervention drug and 12.6% reached a dominant result of the intervention drug over the comparison from model simulation. The reporting quality of included studies ranged from 19 to 25 (on a scale of 28), with an average of 22.3. The statistical tests indicated that industry-funded studies were significantly more likely to conclude that the intervention therapy was economical (p<0.01) and had a significantly higher proportion of resulting target drug economically dominated the comparison drug (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The study revealed that FCOI bias is common in published pharmacoeconomic evaluations conducted in Chinese settings and could significantly influence the study's economical results and conclusions through various mechanisms. Multifaceted efforts are needed to improve transparency, comparability and reporting standardisation.

Cost-effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-utility studies

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the cost-utility evidence of TNF-a-i treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to estimate the pooled incremental net benefit (INBp).

METHODS

We selected economic evaluation studies reporting the cost-utility of TNF-a-i compared to other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) after a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Tufts Medical Centers' cost-effective analysis registry. The results were reported as pooled INB in purchasing power parity-adjusted US dollars, along with 95% confidence intervals. We used GRADE quality assessment to present summaries of evidence and random-effects meta-analysis to synthesize cost-utility of TNF-a-i.

RESULTS

We included 86 studies for systematic review, of which 27 for meta-analysis. TNF-a-i is not cost-effective [$ -4,129(-6,789 to -1,469)] compared to other DMARDs but with high heterogeneity. There was no evidence of publication bias (p = 0.447). On separate analysis, TNF-a-i is not cost-effective [$ -4,805(-7,882 to -1,728)] compared to conventional synthetic DMARDs for RA treatment. GRADE assessment indicated very low confidence in pooled cost-utility results and likely presence of risk of bias on the overall ECOBIAS checklist in studies.

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence during the study period, TNF-a-i is not a cost-effective option for treating RA compared to other DMARDs. However, high heterogeneity and low confidence in GRADE quality assessment preclude the results from being generalizable.

Cost Effectiveness of Rituximab Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cost-Utility Studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Depletion of B cells is shown to be clinically effective for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. Although B-cell depletion therapy with rituximab is indicated for RA patients who have failed to other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), primary cost-effectiveness evidence is inconsistent. We aimed to provide synthesised cost-effectiveness evidence of rituximab in the treatment of RA compared to other DMARDs, since the published cost-effectiveness evidence is mixed.

METHODS

We identified economic evaluation studies reporting cost-utility of rituximab compared to other DMARDs by searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Tufts Cost-Effective Analysis registry. Using random-effects meta-analysis, we pooled incremental net benefit (INB) in (purchasing power parity) adjusted US$ with 95% confidence intervals. We used the modified economic evaluations bias checklist and Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) instrument for quality appraisal. The study protocol was pre-registered with PROSPERO, CRD 42021222541.

RESULTS

Of the selected 18 studies, the majority were from high-income countries (n = 14) followed by upper middle-income countries (n = 3) and lower middle-income countries (n = 1), with minimal risk of bias. Rituximab is significantly cost effective with a pooled INB (95% CI) of $8767 (720 to 16,814). On subgroup analysis, rituximab is significantly cost effective from a health system perspective [$12,832 (3392 to 22,272)], for studies using 3.5% discount rate [$15,468 (5973 to 24,963)] and a for a time horizon of less than 5 years [$8496 (1547 to 15,445)]. In a separate analysis, rituximab as third-line therapy (for conventional synthetic DMARDs followed by any other biologic DMARD failed patients) was not cost effective compared to DMARDs [$5314 (-2278 to 12,905)]. Further, the GRADE assessment indicated very-low confidence in the pooled results.

CONCLUSION

Rituximab is cost effective compared to other DMARDs but not if used as third-line therapy after failure of biologics. There is a need to generate context-specific evidence for the lower income settings.

Efficacy and safety of HLX01 in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy: a phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of HLX01, a rituximab biosimilar, as combination therapy with methotrexate in Chinese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who had inadequate responses to methotrexate.

METHODS

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, biologic-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate responses to methotrexate were randomized 2:1 to receive 1000 mg HLX01 or placebo intravenously on days 1 and 15. On the first day of weeks 24 and 26, patients in both groups received 1000 mg HLX01 via intravenous infusion. The primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response rate at week 24. Secondary endpoints including efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were assessed up to week 48.

RESULTS

Between 28 May 2018 and 11 September 2020, 275 patients were randomized to the HLX01 group (n = 183) or the placebo group (n = 92). At week 24, the proportion of patients achieving ACR20 response was significantly greater in the HLX01 group compared with the placebo group in the intention-to-treat population (60.7% vs 35.9%; P < 0.001) and per-protocol set (60.3% vs 37.1%; P < 0.001). Most secondary efficacy endpoints favoured HLX01 when assessed at weeks 12, 24, 36 and 48. Incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between groups. Infusion-related reactions occurred more frequently following the initial two doses of HLX01 than the subsequent doses.

CONCLUSIONS

HLX01 plus methotrexate improved clinical outcomes compared with placebo in Chinese patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had inadequate responses to methotrexate. This treatment regimen was well tolerated, showing comparable safety profiles to placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03522415 . Registered on 11 May 2018.

Implementation of the treat-to-target approach and treatment satisfaction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: perspectives of Chinese rheumatologists

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the implementation of treat-to-target (T2T) and treatment satisfaction from Chinese rheumatologists' perspectives.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis of a cross-sectional database collected from rheumatologists and their adult patients with RA in China using Adelphi Real World Disease Specific Programme™ methodology. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate factors associated with T2T use, achievement of T2T goals, and physician treatment satisfaction.

RESULTS

Sixty physicians provided data for 600 patients, of whom 39.0% (234/600) were being treated using T2T, and 64.9% (366/564) had achieved their T2T goal. Physicians were satisfied with treatment in 74.3% (445/599) of patients. Patients with a higher pain score were more likely to be managed using T2T (odds ratio (OR) 1.25; p = 0.017), but less likely to have achieved the T2T goal (OR 0.76; p = 0.004). T2T use was more likely if patients had a longer time since diagnosis (> 2 vs ≤ 2 years; OR 1.61; p = 0.031) or received targeted synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs or bDMARDs; OR 6.90; p < 0.001). T2T goal achievement was more likely for patients with higher body mass index (≥ 24 vs < 24 kg/m²; OR 2.73; p = 0.001) or full-time employment (OR 2.11; p = 0.005). Physician treatment satisfaction was more likely if the T2T goal was achieved (OR 4.78; p < 0.001) or tsDMARDs or bDMARDs were used (OR 2.58; p = 0.017), and less likely if pain scores were higher (OR 0.79; p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

T2T implementation in China is suboptimal. Our findings provide insight into T2T implementation and physician treatment satisfaction, supporting T2T use in Chinese RA clinical practice. Key Points • T2T implementation in China is currently suboptimal. • Patients with greater pain were more likely to be managed using T2T but were less likely to have achieved their T2T goals. • Physician treatment satisfaction was associated with T2T goal achievement.

Quality of Health Economic Evaluations in Mainland China: A Comparison of Peer-Reviewed Articles in Chinese and in English

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to assess the incidence and quality of reporting of published health economic evaluations in mainland China and compare the quality of peer-reviewed articles in Chinese and English.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted for economic evaluations pertaining to China published from 2006 to 2015 using the PubMed, CBM, CMCC, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases. All studies in English that met the inclusion criteria were included. For studies in Chinese, 200 sampled studies were included according to the random seeds method, and the same number of the most-cited studies in Chinese as those in English were included according to the number of citations and journal grades. Researchers independently assessed the quality of the studies using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

After literature search and screening, a total of 310 studies were identified. The majority of these studies were cost-effectiveness studies (82.26%). Scores among different CHEERS items varied greatly. There was a gap between the average quality scores of the studies published in Chinese and those published in English (49.78 ± 9.31 vs. 82.48 ± 17.69) and between the average quality scores of the included most-cited studies in Chinese and English, which was slightly smaller (54.08 ± 10.27 vs. 82.48 ± 17.69). The methods, results, and discussion sections of studies published in Chinese were of low quality.

CONCLUSION

The quality of reporting of health economic evaluations in mainland China has developed slowly. Most of the included studies were incomplete in the presentation of content, making the results less reliable. It is important to standardize and improve the quality of Chinese health economic research.

Sequences of biological treatments for patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in the era of treat-to-target in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are recommended to be added in sequentially in the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). All these drugs, however, are substantially more expensive than conventional synthetic DMARDs throughout the world, including in China. The objective of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment sequences of bDMARDs for patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis from the Chinese healthcare system perspective.

METHODS

An individual patient simulation model was used to track the course of patients from first treatment through switches to further lines in a sequence. The comparator treatment sequence commenced with methotrexate, followed by non-biologic therapy. The intervention sequences were assumed to be the combinations of bDMARDs available, followed by non-biologic therapy. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and lifetime costs were estimated. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were performed to evaluate the model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Compared with the comparator treatment sequence, bDMARDs sequences were associated with more life years, QALYs, and cost. These produced ICERs ranged from $27,441.36/QALY to $40,149.2/QALY, above the willingness-to-pay threshold of $10,378 per QALY. The uncertainty analyses and the scenario analyses confirmed the result of the base case analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, bDMARDs sequences are estimated not to be cost-effective compared with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug strategy for patients with moderate-to-severe RA at a WTP threshold of $10,378 per QALY. Price reductions are warranted to make bDMARDs cost-effective and affordable.

Tofacitinib in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis in China: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Based on a Mapping Algorithm Derived from a Chinese Population

INTRODUCTION

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib for patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who failed conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs from the Chinese healthcare system perspective.

METHODS

An individual patient simulation model was used to estimate the lifetime cost and effectiveness. The comparator sequence commenced with etanercept, followed by rituximab-tocilizumab- non-biologic therapy. The intervention sequences were assumed to add tofacitinib to different positions in the comparator sequence. Quality-of-life estimates were generated by mapping Health Assessment Questionnaire scores to utility with the algorithm derived from a Chinese population. Scenario analyses, univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Compared with the comparator sequence, patients receiving tofacitinib as the first-, second-, third- and fourth-line treatment gained additional 0.49, 0.59, 0.44 and 0.53 QALYs, respectively, and the use of tofacitinib as the first- and second-line treatment was less costly, whereas the use of tofacitinib as the third- and fourth-line treatment cost an additional $234,998 and $381,116, respectively. This produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $333.73 and $9669.34/QALY, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Tofacitinib is estimated to be dominant in both the first- and second-line settings and to be highly cost-effective in both the third- and fourth-line settings.

Cost-effectiveness of Triple Therapy vs. Biologic Treatment Sequence as First-line Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients after Methotrexate Failure

Introduction

A clinical trial (RACAT) reported the noninferiority of triple therapy compared to biologic agents (etanercept + methotrexate), and previous studies confirmed that biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are more expensive but less beneficial than triple therapy for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in whom methotrexate (MTX) fails. However, from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, the cost-effectiveness of triple therapy versus bDMARD treatment sequences as a first-line therapy for patients with RA is still unclear.

Methods

An individual patient simulation model was used to extrapolate the lifetime cost and health outcomes by tracing patients from initial treatment through switches to further treatment lines in a sequence. Therapeutic efficacy and physical function were evaluated using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response, 28-Joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28), and Health Assessment Questionnaire score. All input parameters in the model were derived from published studies, national databases, local hospitals, and experts’ opinions. Both direct costs and indirect costs were taken into consideration. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were performed to test the uncertainty of the model, as were multiple scenario analyses.

Results

The lifetime analysis demonstrated that triple therapy was associated with lower costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than bDMARD sequences. These resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranging from $87,090/QALY to $104,032/QALY, higher than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold in China ($30,950/QALY). The baseline DAS28 impacted the model outcomes the most. Scenario analyses indicated that adding triple therapy to bDMARD sequences as a first-, second-, third-, or fourth-line therapy is very cost-effective, at a WTP of $10,316/QALY.

Conclusions

From a Chinese payer perspective, triple therapy as first-line treatment in treatment sequence could be regarded as cost-effectiveness option for patients who failed MTX, compared to bDMARDs as first-line treatment, and instead of prescribing triple therapy as a substitute for bDMARDs as a first-line treatment, adding triple therapy to the bDMARD treatment sequence is likely to be very cost-effective for patients with active RA compared to bDMARD sequences.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-021-00300-4.

Quantitative Evidence Synthesis Methods for the Assessment of the Effectiveness of Treatment Sequences for Clinical and Economic Decision Making: A Review and Taxonomy of Simplifying Assumptions

Sequential use of alternative treatments for chronic conditions represents a complex intervention pathway; previous treatment and patient characteristics affect both the choice and effectiveness of subsequent treatments. This paper critically explores the methods for quantitative evidence synthesis of the effectiveness of sequential treatment options within a health technology assessment (HTA) or similar process. It covers methods for developing summary estimates of clinical effectiveness or the clinical inputs for the cost-effectiveness assessment and can encompass any disease condition. A comprehensive review of current approaches is presented, which considers meta-analytic methods for assessing the clinical effectiveness of treatment sequences and decision-analytic modelling approaches used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment sequences. Estimating the effectiveness of a sequence of treatments is not straightforward or trivial and is severely hampered by the limitations of the evidence base. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of sequences were often absent or very limited. In the absence of sufficient RCTs of whole sequences, there is no single best way to evaluate treatment sequences; however, some approaches could be re-used or adapted, sharing ideas across different disease conditions. Each has advantages and disadvantages, and is influenced by the evidence available, extent of treatment sequences (number of treatment lines or permutations), and complexity of the decision problem. Due to the scarcity of data, modelling studies applied simplifying assumptions to data on discrete treatments. A taxonomy for all possible assumptions was developed, providing a unique resource to aid the critique of existing decision-analytic models.

Systematic Literature Review of Economic Evaluations of Biological Treatment Sequences for Patients with Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis Previously Treated with Disease-Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drugs

OBJECTIVE

This systematic literature review (SLR) had two objectives: to analyse published economic evaluations of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) previously treated with DMARDs and to assess the quality of those that included sequences of treatments.

METHODS

We performed an SLR on PubMed, Central, Cochrane, and French databases from January 2000 to December 2018. The search focused on cost-effectiveness/utility/benefit analyses. We extracted data on treatment sequences, outcomes (e.g. quality-adjusted life year) and choices of economic evaluation methods (e.g. model type, type of analysis, and method of utility estimation). We analysed the improvement of methods by comparing two sub-periods (2000-2009 and 2010-2018). The quality of reporting and the quality of the methods were assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and a set of eight key aspects for a reference case for economic evaluation of bDMARDs based on the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) and Drummond checklists. Data extraction and study assessment were performed independently by two health economists.

RESULTS

From the 824 records identified in the initial search, 51 publications were selected. Of these, 31 included sequences. Individual models such as discrete-event simulations were used in over two-fifths (22/51, 43%) of the selected studies. Few studies (7/51, 14%) used utility scores based on generic instruments (e.g. EQ-5D). Estimation of hospitalization costs was described in only approximately one-third of studies (19/51). Loss of quality of life (QoL) related to adverse events such as tuberculosis and pneumonia was included in one-tenth (5/51, 10%) of the studies. It was difficult to compare the results of the economic evaluations (i.e. incremental cost-effectiveness ratios) due to the high heterogeneity of studies in terms of disease stage, data sources, inputs, and methods of health outcome assessment used. For identified studies including sequences, the CHEERS assessment of reporting quality showed insufficient reporting of uncertainty analyses and utility weights in more than a third of the studies (11/31, 35%; 9/25, 36%). An in-depth assessment of the quality of the studies revealed that only seven, mostly conducted during the sub-period 2010-2018, addressed the majority of methodological quality assessment issues such as the simulation of patient sequence pathways, the use of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of comparative effectiveness, the choice of treatment sequence, and rules for switching.

CONCLUSION

Our SLR identified a lack of high-quality evaluations assessing bDMARD sequences, although some improvements were made in the reporting and modelling of patients' pathways in studies published after 2010. In order to improve economic evaluations of RA, clear health technology assessment guidance on RA health-related QoL instruments must be provided, and data including long-term disease progression must be made available.

Mapping between HAQ-DI and EQ-5D-5L in a Chinese patient population

OBJECTIVES

In order to address the current deficiency of health utility evidence relevant for economic evaluations involving treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the Chinese setting, this study aims to develop a mapping algorithm linking the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and EQ-5D-5L in a Chinese population of patients with RA.

METHODS

An estimation sample was obtained from a cross-sectional study that collected HAQ, the pain Visual Analogue Scale, and EQ-5D-5L in RA patients in two tertiary referral hospitals in China. Mapping algorithms were derived in this study using two alternative regression methods: the beta regression and a multivariate ordered probit regression. The internal validity of the mapping algorithms was assessed in each case by calculating predictive performance using a bootstrapping procedure.

RESULTS

Of the several algorithms developed using these data, predictive performance was shown to be better when VAS pain was included as a predictor and when the multivariate ordered probit regression method was used, rather than the beta regression method. The algorithms developed were shown to be comparable, in terms of predictive performance, to existing mapping studies despite the small sample size of the estimation data.

CONCLUSION

It is hoped that the availability of these algorithms will facilitate the development of cost-effectiveness studies evaluating RA treatments in the Chinese health care setting.

Adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, certolizumab pegol, golimumab, tocilizumab and abatacept for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis not previously treated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and after the failure of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs only: systematic review and economic evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease associated with increasing disability, reduced quality of life and substantial costs (as a result of both intervention acquisition and hospitalisation). The objective was to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of seven biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) compared with each other and conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs). The decision problem was divided into those patients who were cDMARD naive and those who were cDMARD experienced; whether a patient had severe or moderate to severe disease; and whether or not an individual could tolerate methotrexate (MTX).

DATA SOURCES

The following databases were searched: MEDLINE from 1948 to July 2013; EMBASE from 1980 to July 2013; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 1996 to May 2013; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1898 to May 2013; Health Technology Assessment Database from 1995 to May 2013; Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects from 1995 to May 2013; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from 1982 to April 2013; and TOXLINE from 1840 to July 2013. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they evaluated the impact of a bDMARD used within licensed indications on an outcome of interest compared against an appropriate comparator in one of the stated population subgroups within a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Outcomes of interest included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) scores and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response. Interrogation of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Study (ERAS) data was undertaken to assess the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) progression while on cDMARDs.

METHODS

Network meta-analyses (NMAs) were undertaken for patients who were cDMARD naive and for those who were cDMARD experienced. These were undertaken separately for EULAR and ACR data. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken to explore the impact of including RCTs with a small proportion of bDMARD experienced patients and where MTX exposure was deemed insufficient. A mathematical model was constructed to simulate the experiences of hypothetical patients. The model was based on EULAR response as this is commonly used in clinical practice in England. Observational databases, published literature and NMA results were used to populate the model. The outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

Sixty RCTs met the review inclusion criteria for clinical effectiveness, 38 of these trials provided ACR and/or EULAR response data for the NMA. Fourteen additional trials contributed data to sensitivity analyses. There was uncertainty in the relative effectiveness of the interventions. It was not clear whether or not formal ranking of interventions would result in clinically meaningful differences. Results from the analysis of ERAS data indicated that historical assumptions regarding HAQ progression had been pessimistic. The typical incremental cost per QALY of bDMARDs compared with cDMARDs alone for those with severe RA is > £40,000. This increases for those who cannot tolerate MTX (£50,000) and is > £60,000 per QALY when bDMARDs were used prior to cDMARDs. Values for individuals with moderate to severe RA were higher than those with severe RA. Results produced using EULAR and ACR data were similar. The key parameter that affected the results is the assumed HAQ progression while on cDMARDs. When historic assumptions were used typical incremental cost per QALY values fell to £38,000 for those with severe disease who could tolerate MTX.

CONCLUSIONS

bDMARDs appear to have cost per QALY values greater than the thresholds stated by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for interventions to be cost-effective. Future research priorities include: the evaluation of the long-term HAQ trajectory while on cDMARDs; the relationship between HAQ direct medical costs; and whether or not bDMARDs could be stopped once a patient has achieved a stated target (e.g. remission).

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003386.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Real-world cost–effectiveness of infliximab for moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in a medium-sized city of China

Aim: To assess the cost–effectiveness of infliximab-containing therapy (ICT) for moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a medium-sized Chinese city. Methods: A Chinese prospective cohort study comparing ICT (25 patients) versus conventional disease-modified antirheumatic drugs (24 patients) for RA was used to assess the cost–effectiveness of ICT. Results: The cohort study observed significantly reduced disease activity score of 28 joints (coefficient -2.718, p < 0.001), improved EQ-5D (coefficient 0.453, p < 0.001) and increased medical costs (coefficient 1.289, p < 0.001) associated with ICT. The incremental cost–effectiveness ratio per gained quality-adjusted life year for ICT versus disease-modified antirheumatic drugs was 1.897-times of the local gross domestic product per capita. Conclusion: Infliximab was a favorable cost-effective alternative option for moderate-to-severe RA in a medium-sized city of China.

Dose reduction of recombinant human tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (etanercept) can be effective in ankylosing spondylitis patients with synovitis of the hip in a Chinese population

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is an immune-mediated inflammatory arthritis and enthesitis involving the spine and peripheral joints. In recent years, specific antagonist of tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNFα, etanercept) 50 mg weekly therapy has rapidly gained popularity for the treatment of AS. However, the dose of etanercept has not been determined in Asian, particularly Chinese populations. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dose reduction of etanercept (50 mg/week in 4 weeks followed by 25 mg/week in 8 weeks) in the treatment of AS with synovitis of the hip, as against the conventional dose (50 mg/week in 12 weeks) in a Chinese population. Forty-three Chinese AS patients with synovitis of the hip were involved in this study. Seventeen of them were randomized to receive conventional dose of etanercept treatment and 26 were given a dose reduction regimen for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was disease activity of response for AS at week 12, including Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), the serum erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), and assessment of synovitis of the hip by ultrasonography. At 12 weeks, all of the patients had responses to some extent and the efficacy variables improved significantly over time, but not between treatment groups. Nine patients experienced at least one adverse event (generally, infections and injection site reactions), most of them mild or moderate. In sum, the dose reduction of etanercept regimen in the 12-week AS treatment was confirmed as a safe and effective therapy as the conventional dose was given.

Inflammatory cytokine levels, disease activity, and function of patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with combined conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or biologics

The objective of this study was to compare the effects of treatment by combined conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) or biologics on cytokines, disease activity, and function in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Sera from a cohort of 81 patients with long-standing RA treated with combined cDMARDs or biologics were measured for 12 cytokines. Comparisons of serum cytokine concentrations with treatment types (combination 2, 3 cDMARDs or biologics), serologic status (positivity for RF and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody (anti-CCP Ab)), DAS28-ESR, and function were performed. Spearman correlation coefficients between individual cytokines and clinical parameters were explored. Approximately half of the patients were prescribed two cDMARDs. Mean duration of current treatment was 42 months. More than 70 % had moderate disease activity or normal function/slight disability. Serum concentrations of interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-17A, IL-23, IL-33, interferon (IFN)-γ, granulocyte monocyte-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), and TNF-α in patients taking combined cDMARDs did not significantly differ from those on biologics. Seventy-nine serum samples (97.5 %) had undetectable levels of 1 to 10 cytokines. Concentrations of several cytokines were significantly higher in patients with moderate to high disease activity, seropositive or poor functional status. Weak correlations between cytokine levels and RA disease activity or function were demonstrated. The highest correlation coefficients were observed with IL-33, IL-8, and IL-6. Long-term treatment with cDMARDs did not differ from biologics with respect to cytokine concentrations, disease activity, and function. The cytokine profiles in established RA were mainly those produced from effector cells, especially IL-6, IL-8, and IL-33. Both IL-8 and IL-33 may be potential biomarkers and/or treatment targets in patients with late RA.

Cost-effectiveness of adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis in Germany

Background

In Germany, the clinical use of TNF-α inhibitors in the therapy of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) grew from 2 % of treated patients in 2000 to 20 % in 2008. In 2012, adalimumab was the bestselling drug in the statutory health insurance system with net expenditure of € 581 mio.

Objectives

We aim to analyze the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab for the treatment of RA in Germany.

Methods

We set up an individual patient sampling lifetime model to simulate 10,000 hypothetical patients. The patients’ functional status improves according to American College of Rheumatology response criteria. In each 6‑month cycle, treatment might be discontinued due to loss of efficacy or adverse events.

Results

In the base case, patients gain 7.07 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) with conventional synthetic therapy and 9.92 QALYs if adalimumab combination therapy is added to the treatment algorithm. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) is € 24,492 based on German list prices. After deducting mandatory rebates and taxes, the ICUR is € 17,277, comparing favorably to analyses in other countries. Adalimumab combination therapy lowers indirect costs from € 162,698 to € 134,363. The ICUR based on total costs is € 14,550 (€ 7,335 after deducting taxes and rebates). Sensitivity analysis shows that adalimumab combination therapy becomes a dominant treatment option for younger baseline populations, i. e. adalimumab is both more effective and less expensive for baseline age 30 due to savings in indirect costs.

Conclusions

Our complex probabilistic model shows that estimation of cost-effectiveness for RA relies on the incorporation of indirect costs and a sufficiently long simulation horizon to capture the complete range of possible outcomes and the associated long-term benefits of biological treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of Tofacitinib in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis in South Korea

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of introducing tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, to the treatment of Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

METHODS

In this cost-utility analysis model, patients transitioned through treatment sequences based on Korean guidelines for RA patients with inadequate response to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Lifetime health-related quality of life and costs were evaluated. Characteristics of the model cohort were based on those reported by the Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis phase 3 triaL (ORAL) Standard randomized Controlled trial of tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo. Efficacy was assessed using American College of Rheumatology response rates, converted to the changes in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) scores, based on tofacitinib clinical trials data. Published clinical trial data on discontinuation rates of the indicated drugs were incorporated in the model. The HAQ-DI scores were mapped onto utility values to calculate outcomes in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); HAQ-DI-to-utility (EuroQoL 5D) mapping was based on data from 5 tofacitinib clinical trials. Costs were analyzed from a societal perspective, with values expressed in 2013 Korean won (KRW). Cost-effectiveness is presented in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). One-way sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model.

FINDINGS

First-line tofacitinib used before the standard of care (base-case analysis) increased both treatment costs and QALYs gained versus the standard-of-care treatment sequence, resulting in an ICER of KRW 13,228,910 per QALY. Tofacitinib also increased costs and QALYs gained when incorporated as a second-, third-, or fourth-line therapy. The inclusion of first-line tofacitinib increased the duration of active immunomodulatory therapy from 9.4 to 13.2 years. Tofacitinib-associated increases in costs were attributable to the increased lifetime drug costs. In sensitivity analyses, variations in input parameters and assumptions yielded ICERs in the range of KRW 6,995,719 per QALY to KRW 37,450,109 per QALY.

IMPLICATIONS

From a societal perspective, the inclusion of tofacitinib as a treatment strategy for moderate to severe RA is cost-effective; this conclusion was considered robust based on multiple sensitivity analyses. The study was limited by the lack of clinical data on follow-up therapy after tofacitinib administration and a lack of long-term data on discontinuation of drug use.

Key data elements for use in cost-utility modeling of biological treatments for rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

Economic evaluation is becoming more common and important as new biologic therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are developed. While much has been published about how to design cost-utility models for RA to conduct these evaluations, less has been written about the sources of data populating those models. The goal is to review the literature and to provide recommendations for future data collection efforts.

METHODS

This study reviewed RA cost-utility models published between January 2006 and February 2014 focusing on five key sources of data (health-related quality-of-life and utility, clinical outcomes, disease progression, course of treatment, and healthcare resource use and costs). It provided recommendations for collecting the appropriate data during clinical and other studies to support modeling of biologic treatments for RA.

RESULTS

Twenty-four publications met the selection criteria. Almost all used two steps to convert clinical outcomes data to utilities rather than more direct methods; most did not use clinical outcomes measures that captured absolute levels of disease activity and physical functioning; one-third of them, in contrast with clinical reality, assumed zero disease progression for biologic-treated patients; little more than half evaluated courses of treatment reflecting guideline-based or actual clinical care; and healthcare resource use and cost data were often incomplete.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these findings, it is recommended that future studies collect clinical outcomes and health-related quality-of-life data using appropriate instruments that can convert directly to utilities; collect data on actual disease progression; be designed to capture real-world courses of treatment; and collect detailed data on a wide range of healthcare resources and costs.

The cost-effectiveness of biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review

Background and Objectives

Economic evaluations provide information to aid the optimal utilization of limited healthcare resources. Costs of biologics for Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are remarkably high, which makes these agents an important target for economic evaluations. This systematic review aims to identify existing studies examining the cost-effectiveness of biologics for RA, assess their quality and report their results systematically.

Methods

A literature search covering Medline, Scopus, Cochrane library, ACP Journal club and Web of Science was performed in March 2013. The cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of one or more available biological drugs for the treatment of RA in adults were included. Two independent investigators systematically collected information and assessed the quality of the studies. To enable the comparison of the results, all costs were converted to 2013 euro.

Results

Of the 4890 references found in the literature search, 41 CUAs were included in the current systematic review. While considering only direct costs, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) ranged from 39,000 to 1 273,000 €/quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained in comparison to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) in cDMARD naïve patients. Among patients with an insufficient response to cDMARDs, biologics were associated with ICERs ranging from 12,000 to 708,000 €/QALY. Rituximab was found to be the most cost-effective alternative compared to other biologics among the patients with an insufficient response to TNFi.

Conclusions

When 35,000 €/QALY is considered as a threshold for the ICER, TNFis do not seem to be cost-effective among cDMARD naïve patients and patients with an insufficient response to cDMARDs. With thresholds of 50,000 to 100,000 €/QALY biologics might be cost-effective among patients with an inadequate response to cDMARDs. Standardization of multiattribute utility instruments and a validated standard conversion method for missing utility measures would enable better comparison between CUAs.

Modeling rheumatoid arthritis using different techniques - a review of model construction and results

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, inflammatory disease with severe effects on the functional ability of patients. Due to the prevalence of 0.5 to 1.0 percent in western countries, new treatment options are a major concern for decision makers with regard to their budget impact. In this context, cost-effectiveness analyses are a helpful tool to evaluate new treatment options for reimbursement schemes.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze and compare decision analytic modeling techniques and to explore their use in RA with regard to their advantages and shortcomings.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMED and 58 studies reporting health economics decision models were analyzed with regard to the modeling technique used.

RESULTS

From the 58 reviewed publications, we found 13 reporting decision tree-analysis, 25 (cohort) Markov models, 13 publications on individual sampling methods (ISM) and seven discrete event simulations (DES). Thereby 26 studies were identified as presenting independently developed models and 32 models as adoptions. The modeling techniques used were found to differ in their complexity and in the number of treatment options compared. Methodological features are presented in the article and a comprehensive overview of the cost-effectiveness estimates is given in Additional files 1 and 2.

DISCUSSION

When compared to the other modeling techniques, ISM and DES have advantages in the coverage of patient heterogeneity and, additionally, DES is capable to model more complex treatment sequences and competing risks in RA-patients. Nevertheless, the availability of sufficient data is necessary to avoid assumptions in ISM and DES exercises, thereby enabling biased results. Due to the different settings, time frames and interventions in the reviewed publications, no direct comparison of modeling techniques was applicable. The results from other indications suggest that incremental cost-effective ratios (ICERs) do not differ significantly between Markov and DES models, but DES is able to report more outcome parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Given a sufficient data supply, DES is the modeling technique of choice when modeling cost-effectiveness in RA. Otherwise transparency on the data inputs is crucial for valid results and to inform decision makers about possible biases. With regard to ICERs, Markov models might provide similar estimates as more advanced modeling techniques.

Small-molecule inhibitors for autoimmune arthritis: success, failure and the future

Treatment of patients with aggressive autoimmune arthritis, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is a considerable challenge for physicians, particularly rheumatologists. Because of the nature of autoimmune arthritis, effective and complete suppression of disease activity has been the primary therapeutic goal. Although currently available disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) can successfully control the disease progression in a large proportion of patients, the benefit/risk ratio is not very much satisfied. The introduction of biologic agents such as anti-tumor necrosis factor-α, anti-interleukin-6, and anti-CD20 brings significant help to those patients with an inadequate response to treatment with DMARDs. In considering the limitation of currently available DMARDs and biologics, the development of new DMARDs, small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs), has recently emerged. In the past few years, a great volume of knowledge has been revealed from the experience of examining the usefulness of several SMIs for therapeutics of autoimmune arthritis. This paper addresses the up-to-date knowledge regarding autoimmune arthritis, therapeutics, findings from recently developed SMIs and the benefits and drawbacks of the development of SMIs. In addition, perspectives on the future development of SMIs for autoimmune arthritis will be described and discussed.

Etanercept biosimilars

Etanercept was the first tumour necrosis factor alpha antagonist approved in the USA for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, in 1998, and then for other diseases. With the etanercept patent set to expire in the EU in 2015, a number of etanercept copies have reached the production phase and are undergoing clinical trials, with the promise of being cheaper alternatives to the reference product. In a global scenario that is favourable to the entry of biosimilars, this article discusses the stage of development, manufacture, clinical trials and the regulatory process involved in the approval of etanercept biosimilars, compiling the literature data. Reducing treatment cost is the principal attraction for biosimilars to emerge in the global market. It is essential for the doctors’ decision on the prescription of these medications, as well as for payers, to have clearly defined studies of clinical equivalence, quality, and safety in order to better evaluate the various copies of etanercept. The authors discuss the need to harmonize different national regulations and the introduction of effective pharmacosurveillance systems for prompt recognition of adverse effects in copies of biopharmaceuticals that differ from those found in the reference products.

Multi-dimensional health assessment questionnaire in China: reliability, validity and clinical value in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the psychometric properties and clinical utility of Chinese Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ-C) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in China.

METHODS

162 RA patients were recruited in the evaluation process. The reliability of the questionnaire was tested by internal consistency and item analysis. Convergent validity was assessed by correlations of MDHAQ-C with Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Hospital anxiety and depression scales (HAD). Discriminant validity was tested in groups of patients with varied disease activities and functional classes. To evaluate the clinical values, correlations were calculated between MDHAQ-C and indices of clinical relevance and disease activity. Agreement with the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) was estimated.

RESULTS

The Cronbach's alpha was 0.944 in the Function scale (FN) and 0.768 in the scale of psychological status (PS). The item analysis indicated all the items of FN and PS are correlated at an acceptable level. MDHAQ-C correlated with the questionnaires significantly in most scales and scores of scales differed significantly in groups of different disease activity and functional status. MDHAQ-C has moderate to high correlation with most clinical indices and high correlation with a spearman coefficient of 0.701 for DAS 28 and 0.843 for CDAI. The overall agreement of categories was satisfying.

CONCLUSION

MDHAQ-C is a reliable, valid instrument for functional measurement and a feasible, informative quantitative index for busy clinical settings in Chinese RA patients.

Including adverse drug events in economic evaluations of anti-tumour necrosis factor-α drugs for adult rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of economic decision analytic models

BACKGROUND

Anti-tumour necrosis factor-α drugs (anti-TNFs) have revolutionised the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). More effective than standard non-biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (nbDMARDs), anti-TNFs are also substantially more expensive. Consequently, a number of model-based economic evaluations have been conducted to establish the relative cost-effectiveness of anti-TNFs. However, anti-TNFs are associated with an increased risk of adverse drug events (ADEs) such as serious infections relative to nbDMARDs. Such ADEs will likely impact on both the costs and consequences of anti-TNFs, for example, through hospitalisations and forced withdrawal from treatment.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to identify and critically appraise if, and how, ADEs have been incorporated into model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of anti-TNFs for adult patients with RA.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed. Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid EMBASE; Web of Science; NHS Economic Evaluations Database) were searched for literature published between January 1990 and October 2013 using electronic search strategies. The reference lists of retrieved studies were also hand searched. In addition, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence technology appraisals were searched to identify economic models used to inform UK healthcare decision making. Only full economic evaluations that had used an economic model to evaluate biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) (including anti-TNFs) for adult patients with RA and had incorporated the direct costs and/or consequences of ADEs were critically appraised. To be included, studies also had to be available as a full text in English. Data extracted included general study characteristics and information concerning the methods used to incorporate ADEs and any associated assumptions made. The extracted data were synthesised using a tabular and narrative format.

RESULTS

A total of 43 model-based economic evaluations of bDMARDs for adult RA were identified from 2,483 initially identified studies (2,473 published; ten technology appraisals). Of these, nine studies had incorporated the incidence and costs of ADEs and were critically reviewed. One study also explicitly estimated the potential consequences for patient utility. There was a general lack of detail specifically reporting on how ADEs were included in the economic models. Furthermore, there was substantial heterogeneity amongst the nine studies concerning the (i) application of risk-related terminology; (ii) method of incorporating the incidence, costs and consequences of ADEs; and (iii) ADE-related assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Model-based economic evaluations have played an integral role in healthcare reimbursement and funding decisions relating to anti-TNFs for adult patients with RA. However, current economic models have not routinely or systematically considered the direct costs or consequences of ADEs, which may bias the estimates of the relative cost-effectiveness of anti-TNFs. Omitting information on relevant costs and consequences of interventions for RA will affect the validity of the associated recommendations for informed decision making. To improve current practice it is recommended that (i) greater efforts be made to provide appropriate long-term safety data on the use of anti-TNFs in adult RA; (ii) empirical research be undertaken to identify and quantify the impact of, and possible methods for, including ADEs in economic models to inform future good practice guidelines; and (iii) economic modelling guidelines and reference cases be updated to explicitly identify ADEs as an important treatment outcome and address how they might be incorporated into economic models. Improved consideration of the possible implications of ADEs in economic models will ensure that healthcare decision makers are provided with reliable and accurate information with which to make efficient reimbursement and financing decisions.

Rituximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: an update

Rituximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody that targets the CD20 molecule expressed on the surface of B cells. It was first used in the treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and later approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that does not respond adequately to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, including the anti-tumor-necrosis-factor (TNF) biologics. Sustained efficacy in RA can be achieved by repeated courses of rituximab. However, the optimal dose and retreatment schedule of rituximab in RA remains to be established. Seropositivity, complete B cell depletion shortly after treatment, and previous failure to no more than one anti-TNF agent are three factors associated with greater clinical benefits to rituximab. Infusion reaction to the first dose of rituximab occurs in approximately 25% of RA patients, and the incidence reduces with subsequent exposure. Immunogenicity to the chimeric compound occurs in 11% of RA patients, but this does not correlate with its efficacy in B cell depletion. Extended observation of randomized controlled trials in RA does not reveal a significant increase in the incidence of serious infections related to rituximab compared to placebo groups, and the infection rate remains static over time. Repeated treatment with rituximab is associated with hypogammaglobulinemia, which may increase the risk of serious, but rarely opportunistic, infections. Reactivation of occult hepatitis B infection has been reported in RA patients receiving rituximab, but no increase in the incidence of tuberculosis was observed. Screening for baseline serum immunoglobulin G level and hepatitis B status (including occult infection) is important, especially in Asian countries where hepatitis B infection is prevalent. The rare but fatal progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy linked to the use of rituximab has to be noted. Postmarketing surveillance and registry data, particularly in Asia, are necessary to establish the long-term efficacy and safety of rituximab in the treatment of RA.