Phase I/II Clinical Trial-Based Early Economic Evaluation of Acalabrutinib for Relapsed Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to construct an early economic evaluation for acalabrutinib for relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) to assist early reimbursement decision making. Scenarios were assessed to find the relative impact of critical parameters on incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

METHODS

A partitioned survival model was constructed comparing acalabrutinib and ibrutinib from a UK national health service perspective. This model included states for progression-free survival (PFS), post-progression survival (PPS) and death. PFS and overall survival (OS) were parametrically extrapolated from ibrutinib publications and a preliminary hazard ratio based on phase I/II data was applied for acalabrutinib. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed, and 1296 scenarios were assessed.

RESULTS

The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £61,941/QALY, with 3.44 incremental QALYs and incremental costs of £213,339. Deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that survival estimates, utilities and treatment costs of ibrutinib and acalabrutinib and resource use during PFS have the greatest influence on the ICER. Probabilistic results under different development scenarios indicated that greater efficacy of acalabrutinib would decrease the likelihood of cost effectiveness (from 63% at no effect to 2% at maximum efficacy). Scenario analyses showed that a reduction in PFS did not lead to great QALY differences (- 8 to - 14% incremental QALYs) although it did greatly affect costs (- 47 to - 122% incremental pounds). For OS, the opposite was true (- 89 to - 93% QALYs and - 7 to - 39% pounds).

CONCLUSIONS

Acalabrutinib is not likely to be cost effective compared with ibrutinib under current development scenarios. The conflicting effects of OS, PFS, drug costs and utility during PFS show that determining the cost effectiveness of acalabrutinib without insight into all parameters complicates health technology assessment decision making. Early assessment of the cost effectiveness of new products can support development choices and reimbursement processes through effective early dialogues between stakeholders.

Cost-Effectiveness of Betrixaban Compared with Enoxaparin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Nonsurgical Patients with Acute Medical Illness in the United States

BACKGROUND

Studies show that the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) continues post-discharge in nonsurgical patients with acute medical illness. Betrixaban is the first anticoagulant approved in the United States (US) for VTE prophylaxis extending beyond hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to establish whether betrixaban for VTE prophylaxis in nonsurgical patients with acute medical illness at risk of VTE in the US is cost-effective compared with enoxaparin.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted, estimating the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with betrixaban (35-42 days) compared with enoxaparin (6-14 days) from a US payer perspective over a lifetime horizon. A decision tree (DT) estimated primary VTE events, thrombotic events, and treatment complications in the first 3 months based on data from the phase III Acute Medically Ill VTE Prevention with Extended Duration Betrixaban study. A Markov model estimated recurrent events and long-term complication risks from published literature. EuroQoL-5 Dimensions utility data and costs inflated to 2017 US dollars (US$) were from published literature. Results were discounted at 3.0% per annum. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses explored uncertainty.

RESULTS

Betrixaban dominated enoxaparin, with savings of US$784 and increased QALYs of 0.017 per patient. In addition, betrixaban dominated enoxaparin across all sensitivity analyses, but was most sensitive to utilities and DT probabilities. Furthermore, probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that betrixaban was more cost-effective than enoxaparin at all willingness-to-pay thresholds.

CONCLUSION

Betrixaban can be considered cost-effective for nonsurgical patients with acute medical illness at risk of VTE, requiring longer VTE prophylaxis from hospitalization through post-discharge.

Cost-effectiveness of roflumilast as an add-on to triple inhaled therapy vs triple inhaled therapy in patients with severe and very severe COPD associated with chronic bronchitis in the UK

Purpose

Patients with severe COPD are at high risk of experiencing disease exacerbations, which require additional treatment and are associated with elevated mortality and increased risk of future exacerbations. Some patients continue to experience exacerbations despite receiving triple inhaled therapy (ICS plus LAMA plus LABA). Roflumilast is recommended by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease as add-on treatment to triple inhaled therapy for these patients. This cost-effectiveness analysis compared costs and quality-adjusted life-years for roflumilast plus triple inhaled therapy vs triple inhaled therapy alone, using data from the REACT and RE2SPOND trials.

Patients and methods

Patients included in the analysis had severe to very severe COPD, FEV1 <50% predicted, symptoms of chronic bronchitis and ≥2 exacerbations per year. Our model was adapted from a previously published and validated model, and the analyses conducted from a UK National Health Service perspective. A scenario analysis considered a subset of patients who had experienced at least one COPD-related hospitalization within the previous year.

Results

Roflumilast as add-on to triple inhaled therapy was associated with non-significant reductions in rates of both moderate and severe exacerbations compared with triple inhaled therapy alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for roflumilast as add-on to triple inhaled therapy was £24,976. In patients who had experienced previous hospitalization, roflumilast was associated with a non-significant reduction in the rate of moderate exacerbations, and a statistically significant reduction in the rate of severe exacerbations. The ICER for roflumilast in this population was £7,087.

Conclusions

Roflumilast is a cost-effective treatment option for patients with severe or very severe COPD, chronic bronchitis, and a history of exacerbations. The availability of roflumilast as add-on treatment addresses an important unmet need in this patient population.

Roflumilast: Who Is Using It and How It Affects Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs

OBJECTIVE

Compare baseline characteristics, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and associated costs of COPD patients treated with add-on roflumilast with those of other combination medications.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODOLOGY

Patients aged 40 years with a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) between March 1, 2011, and Nov. 30, 2012, were identified from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database and classified as roflumilast or nonroflumilast combination-therapy cohorts. Baseline characteristics were compared for all patients. HCRU and costs were compared between matched (M) roflumilast and nonroflumilast cohorts, using propensity score as a partial balancing score and then complementing the score with exact matching on specifically important variables. Generalized linear model and Poisson regression were used to estimate the adjusted differences in total costs and hospitalization rates, respectively, between the 2 matched cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 695 roflumilast and 30,542 nonroflumilast combination therapy users were identified. At baseline, the roflumilast cohort had more complex COPD and a higher number of severe and moderate COPD exacerbations relative to the nonroflumilast cohort. After matching, the roflumilast (M) and nonroflumilast (M) cohorts (n = 328 in each) had similar mean age, gender distribution, and follow-up time. The roflumilast (M) cohort had significantly higher pharmacy-related, per-patient, per-month (PPPM) costs (P < .001) and similar total cost (P = .90). After adjusting for confounding variables, no difference was observed between the 2 cohorts in total costs (P = .86) and number of hospitalizations (P = .65).

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that patients in the roflumilast cohort, relative to the nonroflumilast cohort, were more severely ill in the real-world setting. Despite higher pharmacy costs, the total cost for the roflumilast cohort was statistically similar to the nonroflumilast cohort. Future studies with longer follow-up are needed to evaluate the long-term economic impact of roflumilast use.

Infectious disease. Combating emerging viral threats

Most approved antiviral therapeutics selectively inhibit proteins encoded by a single virus, thereby providing a “one drug-one bug” solution. As a result of this narrow spectrum of coverage and the high cost of drug development, therapies are currently approved for fewer than ten viruses out of the hundreds known to cause human disease. This perspective summarizes progress and challenges in the development of broad-spectrum antiviral therapies. These strategies include targeting enzymatic functions shared by multiple viruses and host cell machinery by newly discovered compounds or by repurposing approved drugs. These approaches offer new practical means for developing therapeutics against existing and emerging viral threats.

Changing the cost of care for chronic myeloid leukemia: the availability of generic imatinib in the USA and the EU

Imatinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor and considered to be the most successful targeted anti-cancer agent yet developed given its substantial efficacy in treating chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and other malignant diseases. In the USA and the European Union (EU), Novartis' composition of matter patent on imatinib will expire in 2016. The potential impact on health system spending levels for CML after generic imatinib becomes available is the subject of significant interest among stakeholders. The extent of the potential savings largely depends on whether and to what extent prices decline and use stays the same or even increases. These are also empirical questions since the likely spending implications following generic imatinib's availability are predicated on multiple factors: physicians' willingness to prescribe generic imatinib, molecule characteristics, and health system priorities. This article discusses each of these issues in turn. We then review their implications for the development of country-specific cost-effectiveness models to predict the implications for cost and quality of care from generic imatinib.

Comparative evaluation of patients newly initiating first-generation versus second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors for chronic myeloid leukemia and medication adherence, health services utilization, and healthcare costs

BACKGROUND

Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treatment guidelines recommend first-line therapy with either first- or second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (1GTKI, 2GTKI), but do not specify which generation should be used first.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between initiation of 2GTKI versus 1GTKI and medication adherence, health services utilization, and healthcare costs.

METHOD

This was a retrospective cohort study utilizing administrative claims data from a single health plan within the US of commercial and Medicare patients newly initiating 1GTKI or 2GTKI therapy for CML between June 2010 and December 2011. Multivariate logistic regression was used to investigate the association between TKI therapy and adherence, defined as proportion of days covered ≥0.85. Multivariate logistic regression and generalized linear models examined the association between TKI and health services utilization and direct healthcare costs (plan and patient paid) during the 12 month follow-up period.

RESULTS

Among the 368 patients included, there was no difference in adherence between patients initiating a 2GTKI compared to a 1GTKI (odds ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-1.40). Initiating a 2GTKI was associated with increased outpatient visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.12, 95% CI 1.06-1.20); however, there were no statistically significant differences in emergency room visits or inpatient visits between the treatment groups. Total costs were 1.3 times higher for 2GTKI initiators versus 1GTKI initiators ($86,509 versus $66,443; p = 0.001), with a significant difference in TKI pharmacy costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there were no differences in adherence, hospitalizations, or emergency room visits among patients initiating a second- versus first-generation TKI, total all-cause costs and outpatient visits were higher for 2GTKI initiators. With the impending release of generic imatinib, these comparative data will become germane in the selection of a first-line TKI therapy. Because this study used claims from a single health plan, it may not be generalizable to the general population.

Cost-effectiveness of roflumilast as an add-on treatment to long-acting bronchodilators in the treatment of COPD associated with chronic bronchitis in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding a selective phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, roflumilast, to a long-acting bronchodilator therapy (LABA) for the treatment of patients with severe-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) associated with chronic bronchitis with a history of frequent exacerbations from the UK payer perspective.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to predict the lifetime cost and outcomes [exacerbations rates, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life years (QALY)] in patients treated with roflumilast, which showed a reduction in the exacerbation rates and lung function improvement in a pooled analysis from two clinical trials, M2-124 and M2-125. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of uncertainties on the cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

The addition of roflumilast to concomitant LABA reduced the number of exacerbations from 15.6 to 12.7 [2.9 (95 % CI 0.88-4.92) exacerbations avoided] and increased QALYs from 5.45 to 5.61 [0.16 (95 % CI 0.02-0.31) QALYs gained], at an incremental cost of £3,197 (95 % CI £2,135-£4,253). Cost in LABA alone and LABA + roflumilast were £16,161 and £19,358 respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in the base case were £19,505 (95 % CI £364-£38,646) per quality-adjusted life-year gained and 18,219 (95 % CI £12,697-£49,135) per life-year gained. Sensitivity analyses suggest that among the main determinants of cost-effectiveness are the reduction of exacerbations and the case fatality rate due to hospital-treated exacerbations. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that the probability of roflumilast being cost-effective is 82 % at willingness-to-pay £30,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of roflumilast to LABA in the treatment of patients with severe-to-very severe COPD reduces the rate of exacerbations and can be cost-effective in the UK setting.

Cost-effectiveness of 3-year vs 1-year adjuvant therapy with imatinib in patients with high risk of gastrointestinal stromal tumour recurrence in the Netherlands; a modelling study alongside the SSGXVIII/AIO trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) is rarely curative in patients at high risk of tumour recurrence and therefore 1 year of post-surgery adjuvant imatinib therapy has been recommended in this sub-group. Recently, adjuvant imatinib therapy administered for 3 years has been demonstrated to further increase recurrence-free survival and overall survival. The goal of this study was to assess the economic value of extending the duration of adjuvant imatinib therapy in high-risk patients in the Netherlands.

METHODS

A multistate Markov model was developed to simulate how patients' clinical status after GIST excision evolves over time until death. The model structure encompassed four primary health states: free of recurrence, first GIST recurrence, second GIST recurrence, and death. Transition probabilities between the health states, data on medical care costs, and quality-of-life were obtained from published sources and from expert opinion.

RESULTS

The expected number of life years (or quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) was higher in the 3-year group than in the 1-year group, 8.91 (6.55) and 7.04 (5.18) years, respectively. In the 3-year and 1-year group, the expected total costs amounted to €120,195 and €79,361, of which, €74,631 (62%) and €27,619 (35%) were adjuvant therapy drug costs, respectively. The difference in health benefits, that is 1.87 life years or 1.37 QALYs, and costs, €40,835, resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of €21,865 per life year gained, and €29,872 per QALY gained.

LIMITATIONS

A limitation of the study was inherently related to the uncertainty around the predictions of RFS. Scenario analyses were conducted to test the sensitivity of different RFS predictions on the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed recurrence due to treatment with longer-term adjuvant imatinib therapy represents a cost-effective treatment option with an ICER below the generally accepted threshold in the Netherlands.

Cost-effectiveness of 3-years of adjuvant imatinib in gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) in the United States

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trial data have demonstrated that 3 years vs 1 year of adjuvant imatinib therapy for patients with surgically resected Kit+ Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) leads to a significant improvement in recurrence-free survival and overall survival. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of treating patients with 3 years vs 1 year of imatinib from a US payer's perspective.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to predict GIST recurrence and treatment costs. Patients enter the model after surgery and transition among three health states: free of recurrence, recurrence, and death. Recurrence, mortality, costs, and utilities were derived from clinical trial and published literature. Expected costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated and discounted at 3%/year. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Patients receiving 3 years of imatinib had higher QALYs (8.53 vs 7.18) than those receiving 1 year of imatinib. Total lifetime per-patient cost was $302,100 for 3 years vs $217,800 for 1 year of imatinib. Incremental cost effectiveness ratio of 3 years vs 1 year of imatinib was $62,600/QALY. Model results were sensitive to long-term rate of GIST recurrence (beyond 5 years) and cost of imatinib. At a threshold of $100,000/QALY, 3 years vs 1 year of imatinib was cost-effective in 100% of simulations.

LIMITATIONS

The model is a simplified representation of disease natural history and may not account for all possible health states and complications associated with disease. Resource utilization on treatment was estimated using the resource use data from previous trials, therefore calculated medical costs might be over-estimated compared to the real-world setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Model results suggest that treatment with 3 years vs 1 year of imatinib is cost-effective at a $100,000/QALY threshold. Clinical and economic results suggest treating surgically resected Kit+ GIST patients with 3 years of imatinib would result in improved quality-adjusted survival.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of roflumilast/tiotropium therapy versus tiotropium monotherapy for treating severe-to-very severe COPD

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing roflumilast/tiotropium therapy vs tiotropium monotherapy in patients with severe-to-very severe COPD.

METHODS

The economic evaluation applied a disease-based Markov cohort model with five health states: (1) severe COPD, (2) severe COPD with a history of severe exacerbation, (3) very severe COPD, (4) very severe COPD with a history of severe exacerbation, and (5) death. Within a given health state, a patient may have a mild/moderate or severe exacerbation or die. Data from roflumilast clinical trials and published literature were used to populate model parameters. The model calculated health outcomes and costs for roflumilast/tiotropium therapy vs tiotropium monotherapy over a 5-year horizon. Incremental cost and benefits were then calculated as cost-effectiveness ratios, including cost per exacerbation avoided and cost per quality adjusted life year ($/QALY).

RESULTS

Over a 5-year horizon, the estimated incremental costs per exacerbation and per severe exacerbation avoided were $589 and $5869, respectively, and the incremental cost per QALY was $15,815. One-way sensitivity analyses varying key parameters produced an incremental cost per QALY ranging from $1963-$32,773.

LIMITATIONS

A number of key parameters used in the model were obtained from studies in the literature that were conducted under different contexts. Specifically, the relative risk estimate for severe COPD patients originates from a small trial not designed to demonstrate the impact of roflumilast on frequency of exacerbations. In addition, the model extrapolates the relative risk estimates over periods of 5-30 years, even though the estimates were only observed in trials that spanned less than a year.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of roflumilast to tiotropium is cost-effective for the treatment of severe to very severe COPD patients.

A 1-year prospective cost-effectiveness analysis of roflumilast for the treatment of patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

RATIONALE

Roflumilast is an oral, once-daily phosphodiesterase IV (PDE4) inhibitor under investigation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study investigated the cost effectiveness of roflumilast in patients with severe to very severe COPD from the perspective of the UK society and UK NHS.

METHODS

The analysis was conducted alongside a 1-year, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational trial. The trial included 1514 COPD patients aged >or=40 years with a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) % predicted <or=50% who were randomised to receive either roflumilast 500microg once daily (n = 761) or placebo (n = 753). Patients in both treatment groups were allowed to receive active treatment with a short-acting bronchodilator (salbutamol or anticholinergic) as needed. About 62% of patients in both groups were using an inhaled corticosteroid at trial entry. They were allowed to continue this on a stable dosage. Direct healthcare and productivity costs were calculated. Resource utilisation was recorded at every scheduled visit in health economics case report forms (HE-CRFs). Trial-wide resource use was combined with UK unit cost (2004 values). Roflumilast was assumed to cost euro1 per day. Incremental costs were related to the differences in the number of moderate to severe exacerbations and the net proportion of patients with an improvement of at least 4 units on the total score of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted. Costs and health outcomes that were missing after withdrawal of patients from the trial were imputed using multiple imputation with the propensity score method. Various sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the data.

RESULTS

In the total group, annual COPD-related costs from a societal perspective were euro1637 in the roflumilast group and euro1401 in the placebo group. From an NHS perspective, this was euro1418 and euro1242, respectively. The rate of moderate to severe COPD exacerbations per patient was low, and no statistically significant difference existed between roflumilast (0.96) and placebo (1.06). The net proportion of patients with a relevant improvement on SGRQ total score was higher in the roflumilast group (0.19) than in the placebo group (0.14), but the difference was not statistically significant. From a societal perspective, COPD-related costs were euro2356 per exacerbation avoided and euro4712 per net additional patient with a relevant improvement on the SGRQ. The probability that roflumilast was cost effective exceeded 70% at a willingness to pay of euro5000 to avoid an exacerbation. In a subgroup of patients with very severe COPD (n = 223), the placebo group had a high exacerbation rate (1.7 per patient per year) whereas roflumilast recipients showed 35% fewer exacerbations (1.1 per patient per year). This resulted in roflumilast dominating placebo. In a subgroup of patients with high healthcare utilisation prior to the study (n = 549) roflumilast recipients showed 19% fewer exacerbations than those receiving placebo, which translated into an ICER of euro804 per exacerbation avoided.

CONCLUSION

Roflumilast increased the overall treatment costs of COPD, although the increase was partly offset by reductions in other forms of healthcare use. Roflumilast has the potential to be cost saving in patients with very severe COPD, due to a statistically significant reduction of exacerbations.

Trends in the prescription and cost of diabetic medications and monitoring equipment in England 1991-2004

BACKGROUND

To report the trend in prescriptions and cost of antidiabetic drugs and glucose monitoring equipment in England from 1991 to 2004.

METHODS

We analysed data on all community antidiabetic drug prescriptions in England collated from the Prescription Cost Analysis system.

RESULTS

The total number of diabetes prescriptions (medicines and monitoring) rose from 7,613,000 (1991) to 24,325,640 (2004) (>300% increase). Meanwhile, total costs increased by 650%. Insulins are the biggest contributor to cost followed by monitoring equipment and then oral medications. Three times as many items of oral tablets are prescribed than insulins. Metformin accounts for 40% of all diabetic drug dispensations but only 7% of the costs. More is spent on glitazones now than on either metformin or sulphonylureas.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a substantial increase in the cost of managing diabetes in the community. Costs are likely to continue to rise in the future, as the prevalence of diabetes increases and through more aggressive identification and management of patients with diabetes in the hope of reducing the even more costly complications. The cost implications of glucose monitoring merits further study.

Assessing the economic value of a new antidepressant. A willingness-to-pay approach

Using the method of willingness to pay (WTP), this study assesses the value of a new antidepressant, moclobemide, relative to that of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), which have equivalent efficacy but less favourable adverse effect profiles. From a published meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials, we identified 7 adverse effects, the risk of which differed significantly between moclobemide and TCAs. We obtained risk reduction data and descriptions of adverse effects from interviews with 95 individuals who had mild to moderate depression and who had been taking one or more TCAs in the previous year. Using a visual analogue scale, respondents ranked and rated each adverse effect. Participants were then asked (using the scenario of additional out-of-pocket drug payment) to quantify the maximum amount that they would pay for a new drug that reduced each adverse effect by the specified probability. Blurred vision and tremor were ranked and rated as the most bothersome adverse effects, with dry mouth being the least bothersome. On average, respondents were willing to pay an additional $Can22 per month [95% confidence interval (CI) 16-28] to reduce the risk of blurred vision from 10 to 5%. The lowest WTP value was for reducing the risk of dry mouth from 40 to 15%, at $Can11 per month (95% CI 8-15). Although not measured directly, we derived 2 estimates of WTP for multiple (i.e. all 7) risk reductions. We obtained upper and lower WTP limits of $Can118 and $Can36 per month, respectively, depending upon aggregation assumptions. Compared with the TCAs amitriptyline and imipramine, the net cost of moclobemide is greater, but the overall net benefit (WTP minus cost) is ambiguous given uncertainty about WTP aggregation over adverse effects. However, compared with the TCAs desipramine and clomipramine, the net benefit of moclobemide is unambiguously positive. We conclude that the WTP approach is a potentially valuable tool that requires more development for use in healthcare economic evaluation.