1
|
Haridoss M, Sasidharan A, Kumar S, Rajsekar K, Venkataraman K, Bagepally BS. Cost-Utility Analysis of TNF-α Inhibitors, B Cell Inhibitors, and JAK Inhibitors Versus csDMARDs for Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment. APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY 2024:10.1007/s40258-024-00898-w. [PMID: 38951442 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00898-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/11/2024] [Indexed: 07/03/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a progressive and debilitating disease, causing persistent joint pain that limits daily activities requiring long-term treatment. Newer targeted therapies expand RA treatment options, but their high cost necessitates a focus on cost effectiveness. To address this, we aim to conduct a cost-utility analysis of these newer RA pharmacotherapies to support evidence-based policy decision-making. METHODS We analyzed the cost-utility of sequential treatment with TNF-α, B cell and JAK-inhibitors compared with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) for RA treatment in methotrexate (MTX) nonresponders. We used a Markov model with lifetime horizon and 6-month cycles from an Indian health system perspective. Costs (INR 2022) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) at a cost-effectiveness threshold of India's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (2022). We assessed uncertainty using univariate, probabilistic sensitivity, and scenario analyses. RESULTS Despite additional QALYs, TNF-α, B cell, and JAK inhibitors were not cost-effective for treating moderate-to-severe patients with RA unresponsive to csDMARDs (including MTX) in India, as increased costs outweighed their clinical benefits. ICERs ranged from 10,46,206 to 31,09,207 Indian Rupees in the base case analysis, exceeding three times India's GDP per-capita [approximately USD $13,287 to $39,487 and GBP £10,776 to £32,025]. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the results' robustness. Scenario analysis suggested that a cost reduction of over 75% in drug prices could make most of the interventions cost effective compared with csDMARDs. CONCLUSIONS TNF-α, B cell, and JAK-inhibitors are not cost-effective compared with csDMARDs for patients with RA who have not responded to MTX in India at the current prices. Cost-effectiveness estimates were highly influenced by drug pricing variations. Therefore, reducing the prices of these interventions could enhance affordability, potentially leading to their inclusion in publicly funded health programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madhumitha Haridoss
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology, R-127, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Phase I and II, Ayapakkam, Chennai, 600077, India
- Division of Medical Research, SRM Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Kattankulathur, 603203, India
| | - Akhil Sasidharan
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology, R-127, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Phase I and II, Ayapakkam, Chennai, 600077, India
| | - Sajith Kumar
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology, R-127, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Phase I and II, Ayapakkam, Chennai, 600077, India
| | - Kavitha Rajsekar
- Health Technology Assessment in India (HTAIn) Secretariat, Department of Health Research, MoHFW, GOI, New Delhi, India
| | | | - Bhavani Shankara Bagepally
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology, R-127, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Phase I and II, Ayapakkam, Chennai, 600077, India.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kumar S, Bagepally BS. Cost-effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-utility studies. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2023; 23:1027-1040. [PMID: 37604704 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2023.2249610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2023] [Revised: 07/12/2023] [Accepted: 08/14/2023] [Indexed: 08/23/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sajith Kumar
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India
| | - Bhavani Shankara Bagepally
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kumar SS, Haridoss M, Venkataraman K, Bagepally BS. Cost-effectiveness of janus kinase inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-utility studies. Front Pharmacol 2022; 13:1090361. [PMID: 36582538 PMCID: PMC9792993 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.1090361] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAK-i), a class of targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tDMARDs), are suggested as second or third-line therapies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Synthesized cost-effective evidence would aid in informed decision-making given the similar clinical effectiveness of JAKi, but incongruent cost-effectiveness reports. Methods: Literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Tufts Medical Centers' cost-effective analysis registry. We pooled the incremental net benefit (INB) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using random-effects model and the heterogeneity was assessed using Cochrane-Q test and I2 statistic. Modified economic evaluation bias checklist was used to assess the quality of selected studies. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot and Egger's test. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment was performed to assess the certainty of outcomes presented. Results: We included seventeen relevant studies for systematic review, of which fifteen were eligible for meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results showed that JAK-i is cost-effective compared to csDMARDS/bDMARDs with a pooled INB (INBp) of $19,886 (95% CI, 1,635 to 38,137) but with considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 99.14). As a second-line treatment for csDMARD failed RA, JAK-i is cost-effective than csDMARD/bDMARD with a pooled INB of $23,144 (74.1-46,214) and high heterogeneity (I2 = 99.67). But on a separate analysis JAK-i as second-line treatment is not cost-effective than TNF-a-i (INBp = $25,813, -5,714 to 57,340). However, leave-one-out analysis found that omitting a single outlier makes JAK-i cost-effective. Further, JAK-i is not cost-effective as a third-line treatment for csDMARD-TNF-a-I failed RA, compared to csDMARDs/bDMARDs with INBp $26,157 (-7,284 to 59,598). Conclusion: Meta-analysis suggests that JAK-i is cost-effective when used after csDMARD failure but not cost-effective when used after csDMARD-TNF-a-i failure with low certainty of evidence. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021222541, identifier CRD42021222541.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S. Sajith Kumar
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India
| | - Madhumitha Haridoss
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India
| | | | - Bhavani Shankara Bagepally
- Health Technology Assessment Resource Centre, ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India,*Correspondence: Bhavani Shankara Bagepally,
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sussman M, Tao C, Patel P, Tundia N, Clewell J, Menzin J. Cost-utility analyses of targeted immunomodulators in rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review. J Med Econ 2020; 23:610-623. [PMID: 31971039 DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2020.1720219] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
Aims: Cost-utility (CU) modeling is a common technique used to determine whether new treatments represent good value for money. As with any modeling exercise, findings are a direct result of methodology choices, which may vary widely. Several targeted immuno-modulators have been launched in recent years to treat moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) which have been evaluated using CU methods. Our objectives were to identify common and innovative modeling choices in moderate-to-severe RA and to highlight their implications for future models in RA.Materials and methods: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify CU models in moderate-to-severe RA published from January 2013 to June 2019. Studies must have included an active comparator and used quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) as the common measure of effectiveness. Modeling methods were characterized by stakeholder perspective, simulation type, mapping between parameters, and data sources.Results: Thirty-one published modeling studies were reviewed spanning 13 countries and 9 drugs, with common methodological choices and innovations observed among them. Over the evaluated time period, we observed common methods and assumptions that are becoming more prominent in the RA CU modeling landscape, including patient-level simulations, two-stage models combining trial results and real-world evidence, real-world treatment durations, long-term health consequences, and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)-related hospitalization costs. Models that consider the societal perspective are increasingly being developed as well.Limitations: This review did not consider studies that did not report QALYs as a utility measure, models published only as conference abstracts, or cost-consequence models that did not report an incremental CU ratio.Conclusions: CU modeling for RA increasingly reflects real-world conditions and patient experiences which are anticipated to provide better information in the assessment of health technologies. Future CU models in RA should consider applying the observed advances in modeling choices to optimize their CU predictions and simulation of real-world outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew Sussman
- Modeling and Evidence, Boston Health Economics, LLC, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Charles Tao
- Modeling and Evidence, Boston Health Economics, LLC, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Pankaj Patel
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research, AbbVie, North Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Namita Tundia
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research, AbbVie, North Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Jerry Clewell
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research, AbbVie, North Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Joseph Menzin
- Modeling and Evidence, Boston Health Economics, LLC, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Frizinsky S, Haj-Yahia S, Machnes Maayan D, Lifshitz Y, Maoz-Segal R, Offengenden I, Kidon M, Agmon-Levin N. The innate immune perspective of autoimmune and autoinflammatory conditions. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2019; 58:vi1-vi8. [PMID: 31769855 PMCID: PMC6878844 DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kez387] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2019] [Revised: 08/01/2019] [Accepted: 08/19/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Innate immunity is one of two immune defence system arms. It is present at birth and does not require 'learning' through exposure to foreign organisms. It activates various mechanisms collectively to eliminate pathogens and hold an infection until the adaptive response are mounted. The innate immune system consists of four elements: the epithelial barrier, cells (e.g. macrophages, NK cells), plasma proteins (e.g. complement) and cytokines. These components act in concert to induce complex processes, as well as recruitment, activation and differentiation of adaptive responses. The innate response is more than just the 'first line of defence', as it essentially withholds the vast majority of any intruder, has a complex interplay with the adaptive arm and is crucial for survival of the host. Finally, yet importantly, a myriad of diseases has been linked with innate immune dysregulation. In this mini-review we will shed some light on these conditions, particularly regarding autoinflammatory ones.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shirly Frizinsky
- Clinical Immunology, Angioedema and Allergy Unit, The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Soad Haj-Yahia
- Clinical Immunology, Angioedema and Allergy Unit, The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Diti Machnes Maayan
- Clinical Immunology, Angioedema and Allergy Unit, The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Yulia Lifshitz
- Clinical Immunology, Angioedema and Allergy Unit, The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Ramit Maoz-Segal
- Clinical Immunology, Angioedema and Allergy Unit, The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Irean Offengenden
- Clinical Immunology, Angioedema and Allergy Unit, The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Mona Kidon
- Clinical Immunology, Angioedema and Allergy Unit, The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Nancy Agmon-Levin
- Clinical Immunology, Angioedema and Allergy Unit, The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Muszbek N, Proudfoot C, Fournier M, Chen CI, Kuznik A, Kiss Z, Gal P, Michaud K. Cost-Effectiveness of Sarilumab Added to Methotrexate in the Treatment of Adult Patients with Moderately to Severely Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Inadequate Response or Intolerance to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2019; 25:1268-1280. [PMID: 31663465 PMCID: PMC10397978 DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2019.25.11.1268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite a substantial number of treatment options in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) following tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) inadequate response or intolerance (TNF-IR), a lack of clarity on the optimal approach remains. Sarilumab, a human monoclonal anti-interleukin-6 receptor alpha antibody, can be used as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate or other conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in TNF-IR patients. OBJECTIVE To conduct a cost-utility analysis from a U.S. health care system perspective for sarilumab subcutaneous 200 mg + methotrexate versus abatacept + methotrexate or a bundle of TNFi + methotrexate for treatment of adult patients with moderately to severely active RA and TNF-IR. METHODS Analysis was conducted via individual patient simulation based on patient profiles from the TARGET trial (NCT01709578); a 6-month decision tree was followed by lifetime semi-Markov model with 6-month cycles. Treatment response at 6 months, informed by network meta-analysis, was based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 criteria; patients achieving ≥ ACR20 continued with current therapy, and other patients moved to the next line of biologic DMARD therapy or conventional synthetic DMARD palliative treatment. Direct costs included wholesale acquisition drug costs and administration and routine care costs. Routine care costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated by predicting the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index score based on treatment response and were imputed from published equations. RESULTS Sarilumab + methotrexate dominated the TNFi bundle + methotrexate, achieving lower costs ($319,324 vs. $356,096) and greater effectiveness (4.27 vs. 4.15 QALYs), and was on the cost-efficiency frontier with abatacept + methotrexate ($360,211 and 4.29 QALYs). Abatacept + methotrexate was not cost-effective versus sarilumab + methotrexate. Scenario analyses indicated the results were robust; sarilumab + methotrexate became dominant against abatacept + methotrexate after reduced model horizon, minimum response based on ACR50 or ACR70, or time to discontinuation per treatment class. Sarilumab + methotrexate was also dominant versus the TNFi bundle; when class-specific time to treatment discontinuation was specified, sarilumab remained cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $36,894. CONCLUSIONS Sarilumab + methotrexate can be considered an economically dominant (more effective, less costly) option versus a second TNFi + methotrexate; compared with abatacept + methotrexate, it is a less costly but less effective option for patients with moderately to severely active RA who have previously failed TNFi. DISCLOSURES This study was funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. Kiss and Gal are employees of Evidera, which received consulting fees from Sanofi/Regeneron for conducting this study. Muszbek was employed by Evidera at the time of this study. Kuznik and Chen are current employees of and stockholders in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. Fournier is an employee of and stockholder in Sanofi. Proudfoot is a former employee of and current stockholder in Sanofi and current employee and stockholder in ViiV Healthcare/GlaxoSmithKline. Michaud has received grant funding from Pfizer and the Rheumatology Research Foundation. The sponsors were involved in the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data as well as data checking of information provided in the manuscript. The authors had unrestricted access to study data, were responsible for all content and editorial decisions, and received no honoraria related to the development of this publication.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Adult
- Aged
- Aged, 80 and over
- Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/economics
- Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use
- Antirheumatic Agents/economics
- Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid/diagnosis
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Decision Trees
- Drug Therapy, Combination/economics
- Drug Therapy, Combination/methods
- Female
- Humans
- Male
- Methotrexate/economics
- Methotrexate/therapeutic use
- Middle Aged
- Models, Economic
- Severity of Illness Index
- Treatment Outcome
- Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/economics
- Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/therapeutic use
- Young Adult
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Kaleb Michaud
- University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, and FORWARD, The National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases, Wichita, Kansas
| |
Collapse
|