Hu S, Liu L, Pollock RF, Pöhlmann J, Wu D, Zhang Y. Intravenous iron for the treatment of iron deficiency anemia in China: a
patient-level simulation model and cost-utility analysis comparing ferric derisomaltose with iron sucrose.
J Med Econ 2022;
25:561-570. [PMID:
35403540 DOI:
10.1080/13696998.2022.2065092]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
Two intravenous (IV) iron formulations, ferric derisomaltose (FDI) and iron sucrose (IS), are currently available for the treatment of iron deficiency anemia (IDA) in China. Clinical studies have demonstrated that FDI has an improved efficacy and safety profile versus IS, while requiring fewer infusions to correct iron deficits. Based on these findings, the present study evaluated the costs and benefits of FDI and IS for the treatment of IDA, from a healthcare system and societal perspective in China.
METHODS
A patient-level model was developed to project time to hematological response and incidence of cardiovascular adverse events and hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) associated with FDI and IS over 5 years. Costs included iron acquisition, administration, and adverse event/HSR treatment costs, based on published studies, fee schedules, and a physician survey. Health state utilities associated with adverse events, HSRs, and the number of infusions were obtained from the literature and a time trade-off survey.
RESULTS
From a healthcare system perspective, FDI was associated with incremental costs of RMB 1,934 (purchasing power parity USD 462) and incremental quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.078 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) versus IS, yielding an incremental cost-utility ratio of RMB 24,901 (USD 5,949) in the base case scenario. From a societal perspective, FDI was associated with reduced total costs and therefore dominant versus IS.
LIMITATIONS
Limitations included the absence of clinical data specific to China and insufficient data to model persistence with treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
This was the first cost-utility analysis comparing FDI and IS for the treatment of IDA in China. Based on a patient-level model, FDI was found to improve quality of life and reduce administration and adverse events costs relative to IS. Using the 2020 Chinese gross domestic product per capita of RMB 72,447 (USD 17,307) as a cost-effectiveness threshold, FDI would be considered cost-effective in China.
Collapse