Search

Background and aims: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) imposes a substantial and ongoing burden on the US healthcare system and society. Molnupiravir is a new oral antiviral for treating COVID-19 in outpatient settings. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness profile of molnupiravir versus best supportive care in the treatment of adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at risk of progression to severe disease, from a US payer's perspective. Methods: The model was developed using a decision tree for the short-term acute phase of COVID-19 and a Markov state transition model for the long-term post-acute phase. This model compared molnupiravir with best supportive care as consistent with the MOVe-OUT trial. Costs were reported in 2021 US dollars. Transition probabilities were derived from the phase III MOVe-OUT trial and the TriNetX real-world electronic health records database. Costs were derived from the TriNetX database and utility values from a de novo, vignette-based utility study. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSA/PSA) were conducted. Primary outcomes included proportion hospitalized, proportion who died overall and by highest healthcare setting at the end of the acute phase, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental costs per QALY gained over a lifetime (100 years) horizon, discounted at 3% annually and assessed at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per QALY. Results: In this model, the use of molnupiravir led to an increase in QALYs (0.210) and decrease in direct total medical costs (−$895) per patient across a lifetime horizon, compared with best supportive care in COVID-19 outpatients. Molnupiravir was the dominant intervention when compared with best supportive care. Patients treated with molnupiravir were less likely to be hospitalized (6.38% vs. 9.20%) and more likely to remain alive (99.88% vs. 98.71%) during the acute phase. Through DSA, molnupiravir treatment effect of hospitalization reduction was identified to be the most influential parameter, and through PSA, molnupiravir remained dominant in 84% of the total simulations and, overall, 100% cost effective. Conclusion: This analysis suggests that molnupiravir is cost effective compared with best supportive care for the treatment of adult outpatients with COVID-19. However, our study was limited by the unavailability of the most recent information on the rapidly evolving pandemic, including new viral variants, patient populations affected, and changes in standards of care. Further research should explore the impact of vaccination on the cost effectiveness of molnupiravir and other therapies, based on real-world data, to account for these changes, including the impact of vaccination and immunity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: A few studies have suggested that patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) who remain persistent with subcutaneous TNF-α inhibitors (SC-TNFi) incur lower health care costs than patients who discontinue treatment, whereas data on the impact of non-persistence on indirect costs are largely lacking. Furthermore, existing estimates are based on fixed follow-ups, in relation to treatment initiation, and therefore do not measure costs in direct relation to treatment discontinuation. Therefore, by capturing costs in direct relation to treatment discontinuation, this study aimed to estimate direct and indirect costs associated with non-persistence with SC-TNFis in IA. Methods: Adult Swedish biologic-naïve IA patients initiating biologic treatment with a SC-TNFi (adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab or golimumab) between May 6, 2010, and December 31, 2017, were identified in population-based registers with almost complete coverage. IA was defined as a diagnosis of rheumatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis/unspecified spondyloarthritis or psoriatic arthritis. Non-persistent patients were matched on propensity score to patients persistent with treatment by at least an additional 12 months. This enabled comparisons of direct healthcare costs and indirect costs for sick leave and disability pension, respectively, 12 months before and 12 months after treatment discontinuation. Results: A balanced cohort of 486 matched pairs was generated. The total direct and indirect costs were significantly higher among non-persistent patients already during the 12 months before index ($20,802 [18,335–23,429] vs. $16,600 [14,331–18,696]). However, while non-persistent patients increased their total direct and indirect costs, persistent patients significantly decreased the same, further widening the difference in costs during the 12-month period after index date ($22,161 [19,754–24,556] vs. $13,465 [11,415–15,729]). Conclusions: Among biologic-naïve Swedish IA patients treated with SC-TNFis, persistent patients incurred about 40% lower aggregated direct and indirect costs compared to non-persistent patients the year following SC-TNFi discontinuation. This highlights the impact of treatment persistence from an economic viewpoint, adding further aspects to the clinical perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Biologic treatments including subcutaneous tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors (SC-TNFis) have greatly improved disease management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) (collectively inflammatory arthritis, IA). Nevertheless, some patients discontinue their first-line treatment; for them, one option may be a subsequent line of the same treatment class (i.e., cycling). The aim of this study was to assess treatment persistence between first- and second-line therapy in Swedish IA patients cycling on SC-TNFis. Methods: Using data from the Swedish Health Data Registers, adult IA patients filling prescriptions between May 1, 2010, and October 31, 2016, for a SC-TNFi (adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab and golimumab) were included. Treatment persistence was derived based on information from filled prescriptions and a 60-day grace period. Unadjusted and adjusted marginal Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to estimate the relative risk of discontinuation across treatment lines, using robust sandwich covariance matrix estimates to account for intrapatient dependence (i.e., multiple treatment lines per patient). The analysis was restricted to the first two lines of treatment. Results: Of the eligible patients, 3181 were identified as cyclers. Among these, most were female (68%), and 46%, 28% and 26% were diagnosed with RA, AS and PsA, respectively. Both the unadjusted and adjusted analyses showed that the relative risk of discontinuing SC-TNFi treatment was significantly lower in second compared to first line (hazard ratio; 0.60 [0.57, 0.63] and HR; 0.59 [0.56, 0.62]). This finding was also consistent across IA indications. Conclusions: In this study of patients cycling on SC-TNFis in IA, persistence was greater in second- compared to first-line treatment. The finding was consistent across all IA indications. Hence, patients who discontinue their first-line treatment may still benefit from treatment with an alternative SC-TNFi as a second-line therapy in IA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are entering the hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment landscape in Hong Kong, prompting the need for cost–effectiveness evaluations of these interventions to enable optimal use of healthcare resources. Aims: This study aimed to compare the cost–effectiveness of DAAs to standard-of-care pegylated interferon plus ribavirin (RBV) in treatment-naïve patients without significant liver fibrosis and to compare different DAAs in patients who are treatment-experienced and/or have advanced liver disease. Methods: A Markov model was constructed to evaluate cost–effectiveness over a lifetime time horizon from the payer perspective. The target population was treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced HCV genotype 1 patients, stratified by degree of liver fibrosis. The model consists of 16 health states encompassing METAVIR fibrosis score (F0–F4), treatment success or failure, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplant, and liver-related death. The proportions of patients achieving sustained virologic response were obtained from clinical trials. Other inputs were obtained from published and local data. The primary outcome was incremental cost–utility ratio for each DAA versus pegylated interferon + ribavirin and among different DAAs. Results: In treatment-naïve F0–2 HCV patients, all DAAs were cost-effective in genotype 1a and daclatasvir + asunaprevir, elbasvir/grazoprevir, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir, and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir were cost-effective compared to pegylated interferon + ribavirin in genotype 1b. In genotypes 1a and 1b, treatment-experienced patients, and F3–4 patients, elbasvir/grazoprevir was the least costly DAA and economically dominant over most other DAAs. Conclusions: DAAs can be a cost-effective option for the treatment of genotype 1 HCV patients in Hong Kong, and elbasvir/grazoprevir is cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Real-world treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is complicated by many factors that are controlled for in the rigorous clinical trial setting. The aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy of elbasvir/grazoprevir in a Veterans Affairs population with chronic HCV genotype 1b infection. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of a cohort of patients aged ≥ 18 years with chronic HCV genotype 1b infection and ≥ 1 prescription of elbasvir/grazoprevir between February 1, 2016, and August 31, 2017. The primary analysis was conducted in the per-protocol population, which included all patients who had at least 11 weeks of treatment and had an available assessment for sustained virologic response (SVR) based on virologic data post–follow-up week 4. Results: The per-protocol population included 3371 patients. Overall, 97.3% of patients were male, 60.3% were black, and 85.5% were HCV treatment–experienced. Comorbidities in this population included hypertension (74.4%), history of alcohol use (55.7%), and depression (54.8%). In total, 97.5% of patients (3288/3371) achieved SVR. Among patient sub-groups, SVR was achieved by 96.0% (290/302) of those with chronic kidney disease stage 4/5, 97.8% (1527/1561) of those with a history of drug use, and 96.6% (831/860) of those with cirrhosis. No statistically significant differences were observed in the proportions of patients achieving SVR, regardless of age, race, HCV treatment history, viral load level, treatment regimen/duration, history of drug or alcohol use, HIV co-infection, or chronic kidney disease. Conclusion: Elbasvir/grazoprevir was highly effective in individuals with HCV genotype 1b infection in a large national Veterans Affairs clinical setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment provides an oral interferon-free treatment regimen with high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR). This study assessed treatment discontinuation, factors associated with treatment completion, and real-world effectiveness. Methods: Patients with HCV treated with LDV/SOF between October 2014 and June 2015 and enrolled in a large US health plan were identified. Expected treatment duration was calculated based on IDSA/AASLD treatment guidelines and US labels using data for genotype, initial treatment regimen, baseline cirrhosis, and prior treatments. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with treatment completion, controlling for patient characteristics. Results: The study included 1483 LDV/SOF patients. Mean age was 59.7 years, most were male (63.9%), had commercial insurance (51.9%), and were treatment-naïve (85.6%). Cirrhosis or end stage liver disease was present in 46.1%. Among patients with an expected 8-week treatment regimen, 49.4% were treated for longer. Most patients (99.8%) with expected 12-week treatment durations were adherent to the expected treatment duration. Treatment-experienced patients [odds ratio (OR) 0.124, p < 0.001] and those on Medicare (OR 0.382, p = 0.039) had lower odds of completing the expected treatment regimen, while males were more likely to complete treatment than females (OR 3.235, p = 0.003). SVR12 in patients treated with LDV/SOF was 89.4% ( n = 76/85). Conclusion: Half of patients eligible for an 8-week treatment regimen with LDV/SOF were treated longer, while most patients with a 12-week regimen were adherent to the expected treatment duration. Prior HCV treatment, female gender, and Medicare Advantage insurance were associated with lower odds of treatment completion. Overall SVR12 was 89.4%. Funding: Merck & Co. Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have improved HCV management in CKD patients, however real-world clinical practice data are limited. Objective: This study examined the prevalence of CKD among HCV patients receiving oral DAAs in a real-world setting. Comorbidities, early discontinuation rates, and healthcare costs were compared between patients with and without CKD. Methods: Patients with HCV who were treated with oral DAAs between November 2013 and June 2015, and who were enrolled in a US health plan, were identified. Early discontinuation was calculated based on observed versus expected treatment duration, and expected treatment duration was based on genotype, initial treatment regimen, baseline cirrhosis, and prior treatments. Healthcare costs were calculated during the baseline, treatment, and post-treatment periods. Results: This study included 3438 patients receiving oral DAAs, of whom 6.9% had a CKD diagnosis. CKD patients were more often male (70.8 vs. 62.9%, p = 0.02) and older (mean age 62.0 vs. 58.8 years, p < 0.001) than non-CKD patients, and had a higher prevalence of most comorbidities. Among early discontinuers, CKD patients were more likely to experience anemia (19.4 vs. 7.7%, p = 0.028). Conclusions: Few patients with CKD receive DAA treatment for HCV infections. HCV patients with CKD had significantly more comorbidities and higher baseline healthcare costs than patients without CKD. Compared with non-CKD patients, CKD patients were equally likely to discontinue DAA treatment early but had higher rates of anemia. This study highlights the need for more renal-friendly HCV therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

B Correction to: PharmacoEconomics 40, 699-714 (2022) b https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-022-01168-0 The following sentence was erroneously omitted from the Acknowledgements section of the article: The authors thank Alvin Ng, Alex Porteous, Faye Saville, Flo Anderson and Jennifer Page, employees of Costello Medical, Cambridge, UK, for deriving the US utility values employed in the analysis. The original article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-022-01168-0. [Extracted from the article]