Search

Objectives: Studies have reported that the presence of elevated anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA)/RF levels, together with joint erosions, is associated with higher disease burden in terms of disability and mortality in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Abatacept has been shown to be effective in this patient population with favourable comparative data against adalimumab. However, few studies have investigated the cost-effectiveness of abatacept in this population to similar treatments such as TNFs. The objective of the study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of abatacept to adalimumab as a first bDMARD in ACPA-positive RA patients who failed treatment with methotrexate (MTX) in Germany., Methods: A decision tree model was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness, from a payer's perspective, of different treatment sequences in RA over a two year time frame. The effectiveness criteria were defined as achieving the treatment target measured by the Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28(CRP)<2.6; "remission"). A treatment switch to a different biologic as 2nd line and 3rd line bDMARD was allowed - in case of not achieving remission with therapy - every 6 months over a two year time period. Effectiveness data was based on randomised controlled trials (RCT) identified by an updated previous systematic literature search by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG). Costs of medication and other direct medical costs were considered. Cost-effectiveness of RA treatment was investigated in ACPA-positive patients and presented as overall costs per day in remission., Results: For ACPA-positive patients, treatment strategies including early treatment with abatacept had lower total costs per clinical outcome compared to later use. Treatment sequences starting with abatacept resulted in lower costs per day in remission (mean 330 €/day, range 328-333 €/day) compared to sequences starting with adalimumab (mean 384 €/day, range 378-390 €/day). Choice of the second or third biologic in the treatment sequences appears to have little impact on the costs per outcome., Conclusions: The results of this analysis suggest that in ACPA-positive RA patients treatment with abatacept appears to have lower costs per response (remission) compared to treatment with adalimumab as a first bDMARD.

Objectives: Switching to a different mechanism of action in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients after a first anti-TNF-α has proved to be effective. The objective of this study was a health economic assessment in Italy., Methods: The study was conducted using a pharmacoeconomic model with a 3-year time horizon. Effectiveness was measured as days gained in low disease activity (LDA; DAS28-ESR <3.2) or in remission (DAS28-ESR <2.6). The model simulated the response to treatments, based on the Rotation Or Change (ROC) trial, the probability of discontinuation and switch to a 3rd-line biologic, and the transition to death. Time on treatment curves for 2nd-line biologics were derived from published Italian real-word data. Costs were estimated based on published sources and Italian prices and tariffs., Results: The switch to tocilizumab after the failure of a first anti-TNF-α was more effective than a second anti-TNF-α, in terms of days in remission (224 vs. 114 days) and of days in LDA (345 vs. 193 days). The cost-consequence ratio with tocilizumab iv was 174 euros/day in remission and 113 euros/day in LDA. With tocilizumab sc the ratio was 181 euros/day in remission and 117 euros/day in LDA. The same ratios for the anti-TNF-α treatments ranged from 233 to Euro 320 euros per day in remission and from 138 to 190 euros per day in LDA., Conclusions: The switch to a different mechanism of action, namely tocilizumab, after the failure of a first anti-TNF-α agent seems a rational strategy for RA patients in the Italian setting.

Objectives: We assessed the level of maintained effectiveness and associated healthcare costs in stabilised rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who reduced doses of adalimumab or etanercept., Methods: Eligible patients were identified from a U.S. commercial insurance database using the following criteria: adults with ≥2 RA diagnoses; effectively treated on standard dose of adalimumab or etanercept for a 6-month baseline period; and ≥3 months of dose reduction within a 6-month assessment period following the index date (date of the first reduced dose). Effectiveness was estimated using a validated claims-based algorithm. Multivariate regression models were used to assess maintained effectiveness and healthcare costs in the short-term (months 7-12) and long-term (months 13-24) following the index date, while adjusting for baseline characteristics. Cost per patient maintaining effective treatment (CPME) was calculated as the average total healthcare costs divided by the proportion of patients with maintained effectiveness., Results: Both groups (etanercept=375; adalimumab=610) had 70% females and a mean age of 48 years. Adjusted rates of maintained effectiveness for etanercept vs. adalimumab were 57.5% vs. 64.7% (p=0.028) in the short-term and 44.3% vs. 51.9% (p=0.047) in the long-term. Adjusted healthcare costs were similar for etanercept- and adalimumab-treated patients (short-term: $15,043 vs. $15,041; long-term: $31,461 vs. $30,449). The CPME was $2,915 higher with etanercept-treated patients in short-term and $12,349 higher in long-term compared with adalimumab-treated patients., Conclusions: Among stabilised RA patients who reduced biologic dosing, a greater proportion of adalimumab-treated patients maintained effectiveness than etanercept-treated patients. Adalimumab was associated with a lower total CPME than etanercept.

Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents are recommended as second-line therapy for patients with axial spondyloarthropathies. This analysis reviewed data on studies investigating the efficacy and tolerability of anti-TNF agents in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) who had failed first-line non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) treatment. Efficacy data from RCTs were used to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) for individual anti-TNFs and then the cost per responder was determined to provide an indication of the value of each therapy. A systematic literature review and analysis of search results over the period January 2008 to September 2014 identified four randomised placebo-controlled trials that were included in the analysis. Adalimumab, etanercept and certolizumab pegol were all effective and well tolerated in patients with nr-axSpA. A patient was more likely to reach ASAS20 or ASAS40 when treated with etanercept or adalimumab, the NNT was lowest for adalimumab, and the risk of adverse events was higher with certolizumab pegol 200 mg every 2 weeks. The cost per responder (NNT) was lowest for adalimumab, followed closely by certolizumab 400 mg every 4 weeks, intermediate for certolizumab 200 mg every 2 weeks and highest for etanercept. Although all anti-TNF agents were associated with clinical improvement in patients with nr-axSpA, adalimumab presented a better cost per responder than etanercept and certolizumab pegol.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to calculate the marginal cost of dose escalation in people with rheumatoid arthritis treated with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors across Europe., Methods: The proportion of people who escalate their dose of TNF inhibitor and the average percentage increase in TNF inhibitor cost associated with escalators versus non-escalators was calculated from previously published estimates, weighted by the sample size for each study. The number of people with rheumatoid arthritis treated with TNF inhibitors and the corresponding total drug sales were obtained for five European countries from Decision Resources' Pharmacor Market Forecast. Method 1 assumed that total sales of a TNF inhibitor represented the cost of an escalator multiplied by the number of escalators plus the cost of a non-escalator multiplied by the number of non-escalators. Method 2 assumed that the drug cost per day used to forecast total sales was calculated using the dose of TNF inhibitor used by non-escalators. The marginal cost of TNF inhibitor dose escalation was estimated by multiplying the difference in cost between escalators and non-escalators by the number of escalators., Results: The estimated increase in TNF inhibitor costs associated with dose escalation in people with rheumatoid arthritis across five European countries (Germany, France, UK, Spain and Italy) was €51.5-54.4 million for adalimumab, €44.8-52.8 million for infliximab and €5.8-5.9 million for etanercept., Conclusions: Dose escalation of the TNF inhibitors adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab in people with rheumatoid arthritis has resulted in an increase in TNF inhibitor costs across five European countries.