Analisi costo-utilità di dupilumab per il trattamento della dermatite atopica grave negli adulti in Italia

Cost-Effectiveness of Dupilumab and Oral Janus Kinase Inhibitors for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Singapore

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) affects both adults and children, impacting their quality of life and productivity; however, traditional systemic treatments such as cyclosporine have limitations. Emerging novel systemic interventions, including monoclonal antibodies and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, have been shown to improve patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of novel systemic interventions for moderate-to-severe AD in adults compared with the best supportive care (BSC) in Singapore.

METHODS

The economic evaluation used a hybrid model consisting of a decision tree and Markov model. Treatment responses at 16 weeks were based on a network meta-analysis that was developed specifically for this study. Long-term response, discontinuation rates, episodes of flares and treatment-emergent adverse events were obtained from key dupilumab, abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib trials. The study had a 5-year time horizon and considered the healthcare payer's perspective. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed as well.

RESULTS

Baricitinib 4 mg and 2 mg have the lowest incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, at Singapore dollars (S$) 60,730/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and S$66,842/QALY, respectively. Upadacitinib 30 mg offers the highest incremental QALY gain, while baricitinib 2 mg offers the least. The cost of the intervention drugs accounted for the highest proportion of the overall expenses (68-93%) for those in the maintenance state. Other influential factors within the model included (1) the incremental utility derived from intervention response; (2) the probability of achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index 75 (EASI-75) with BSC; and (3) the relative risk of achieving EASI-75 with the interventions. In a scenario where the cost of all drugs is matched to the lowest-priced drug, the top three cost-effectiveness interventions are dupilumab, upadacitinib 30 mg and abrocitinib 200 mg, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The interventions are found to be cost-effective at their existing prices when compared with BSC. Ideally, a composite score of treatment success and quality-of-life scores ought to be included, but such data were unavailable. Future research should consider conditional discontinuation data and long-term outcomes when such data become accessible.

Cost–Utility Analysis of Dupilumab for the Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) in Italy

The objective of this analysis was to estimate the incremental cost–utility ratio (ICUR) of dupilumab as an add-on treatment to best supportive care (BSC), versus BSC alone, in Italy for severe uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). A simulation of outcomes and costs was undertaken using a 1-year decision tree, followed by a lifetime horizon Markov model. Clinical data were derived from a pooled analysis of two studies (SINUS-24 NCT02912468 and SINUS-52 NCT02898454). The Italian National Healthcare Service (NHS) perspective was considered. Model robustness was tested through sensitivity analyses. In the base-case analysis, treatment with dupilumab + BSC resulted in an increase in quality of life-adjusted survival (+1.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALY-gained)), compared to the BSC alone. The resulted ICUR was €21,817 per QALY-gained and it is below the acceptability threshold commonly used in Italy. Both one-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of base-case results. The cost–utility analysis showed that dupilumab, as an add-on treatment to BSC, is a cost-effective therapeutic alternative to BSC in the treatment of patients with severe uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, confirming that it is economically sustainable.